Re: [OPSAWG] WG LC for draft-ietf-opsawg-sdi-02

Warren Kumari <> Sun, 09 February 2020 21:49 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1029D12004E for <>; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 13:49:42 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eYuYqV68FDzy for <>; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 13:49:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::732]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1ACA812004C for <>; Sun, 9 Feb 2020 13:49:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id q15so4707911qki.2 for <>; Sun, 09 Feb 2020 13:49:40 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=phgTEgvSIO+41YrdiiTaNj3s8jfX2LKyl50Ef1xb8KE=; b=fDK0+Sqcddwy9XsJ7IlqB+kJkrhA9GiiM//EbVC/vXWPPbEjy8ecJUbbFpgo3oc7FV Z8Z6NDAQBFbj06DZArwSRLGGPGiV9+k6PL9AioSZ2qn/haizvJSRznnpjwhmcTVJVhkb 5n//Ia/ZO5Mod6MgSgw+5Hi3Y1kGF7KAX1Us5/gyvWEpP3OljvjA5sGCP4iUjsS9LeuI UPWmvhQhxxPxZRbx09ffr9qDkifLASp23JPWVZ1JKUv5wmDuWkV0Fo7UP4Y9ylz1wm54 gS1H0OHQ/kTHamh5cRB+2w1q+P+IafUIZZrjgybgBbl5jOuSJo5/aGUoEVF9nky1u/Zq KnUA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=phgTEgvSIO+41YrdiiTaNj3s8jfX2LKyl50Ef1xb8KE=; b=K9XXN5siSF/OdNAXTYiOIcadoXCDVXCsYQKOKyP7CmLoavpEjrE5p+onO/UJgqZzmM 7gLkOZIZRRkDAlpLh2DjimWDG3716T9mydYeB+V1V13RvDtSBBypEhBa7hYQcl/x14Ii 8VoRnYClDjC+peOVoZ8riAIcHMMoHLRGsiDTT4Hh4DeJre8TtZSUqSVBHY0s6DQYlouu FjA/lztbPP8eGlaLkZKNZoStjU+RAz7hddx+Kv91D6D5UStpRfsWWTIfeNLtA8Qe9EOz NktbIbsIsjxL7ZjVVYleVEBUYTkcrlFWT+O85O4rYFZfbWEz1dM5Ep8SDTMOO9KTGe58 sg/A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAU7hK8mJAJiP7Y3jAFNN3PYNcFiMq14w3ziESZp0VPot5q+ICpm usu1T2byGlWdmSsIbdBaWFFZ7iwcZtTyrneznoDjHQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyPBnsT38BVqejp4oX9+hhW9rZ6vfUhN9Rgpzzhow/vp/RH+9phEu6Cv3Hw1ETAHOQ++1WwaTB8R/Jl0hxskD0=
X-Received: by 2002:a37:a80e:: with SMTP id r14mr8294714qke.192.1581284978973; Sun, 09 Feb 2020 13:49:38 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Warren Kumari <>
Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2020 16:49:02 -0500
Message-ID: <>
To: "Joe Clarke (jclarke)" <>
Cc: opsawg <>, "" <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] WG LC for draft-ietf-opsawg-sdi-02
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Feb 2020 21:49:42 -0000

Dear OpsAWG,

As there has been no feedback, I have to assume that you think that
this document is **absolutely** perfect, and contains nothing unclear,
inaccurate or confusing. Franky, this surprises me - I'd thought that
the bit about the penguins was somewhat vague...

(Yes, this is just a thinly veiled attempt to try and get more review
and feedback :-))

On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 12:41 PM Joe Clarke (jclarke) <> wrote:
> With the publication of -02 of this draft, it seems to have reached stability.  There has been interest in both usage an implementation of this draft expressed in the past, but discussion has been quiet lately.
> This email serves as a two-week start of a WG LC for this document.  Please [re-]read this draft and comment on its content as well as whether or not you feel it’s ready.  WG LC will conclude on February 18, 2020.
> Authors and contributors, please reply on-list as to whether or not you are aware of any intellectual property attributed to this work.  Reply that either you are not aware of any such IP, or reply with the details of known IP while also making sure you complete any IPR disclosures in data tracker.
> Joe and Tianran

I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.