IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSAWG] New I-D -> Guidelines for Charactering "OAM"

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Mon, 08 January 2024 20:07 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6CB5C18DBBF for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:07:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.406
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.406 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vlWBAcO9GjJb for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:07:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87D43C18DBBC for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 12:07:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DEEC1800D; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 15:07:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id OLBlICS6Q9kJ; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 15:07:43 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18A6A1800C; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 15:07:43 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1704744463; bh=8AZkuSMnwRYEHM5WSDoHD++bN+c8WR6akudysNkKOIA=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=Oy16lU0vBrs9c4AJ+IrpFux4lT4autj5GNiJT7iyOLxFhTAjSFD+hnD16r4Oi5TFj TTa2BPnAEgp+cQspZ4+z/+Y1KHN9Yf+xjF1K2192vQ+PAG2esgDRTaxFViq7kOQscN kYE2PR61t6iT3ymRALSXBax864JHDwfDqkdxtSn/hBY3QFzg5L12jvil9qKCwiPHqi Bzf1O5bIet57DY9q1yFg3IAH2JvjMjNZI8go1VO4VFKSHnmOAlVjUqsCocbe8AzDyY gH9H70DKxGEjbV9xISrYTo6LgdNZnmMvfXzrjL/2QAVHNvxbzqf8T7+xRIUTaUKgs9 PoebYlencqE7Q==
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13F6239; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 15:07:43 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Carlos Pignataro <cpignata@gmail.com>, Ops Area WG <opsawg@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACe62MmSe1_+mL651-rrj3HqiD37Npw3QL4q0vP7L9gMJS9P3A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACe62MncZZOzad8Z25+6rx3LwKFUuL073A_G4yVTqT9z8XntcA@mail.gmail.com> <3572.1704657289@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <CACe62MmSe1_+mL651-rrj3HqiD37Npw3QL4q0vP7L9gMJS9P3A@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 28.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2024 15:07:43 -0500
Message-ID: <12384.1704744463@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/opsawg/9UfM6Mtby1dU1IJyzYQBhbaUce8>
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] New I-D -> Guidelines for Charactering "OAM"
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/opsawg/>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2024 20:07:51 -0000

Carlos Pignataro <cpignata@gmail.com> wrote:
    > The more practical approach, considering the above, seems to progress this
    > document as an RFC and use the same BCP 161 (as RFC6291) -- not sure how to
    > signal that in the I-D.

Yes, adding this new RFC to BCP161 would make sense.
I don't think that there is a specific way to signal this, except that you
are updating 6291, and you can write some text explaining why, and it would
go into the Shepherd write up.

    >> Path-Congruent is a nice technically accurate term.
    >> I'm just sure that congruent is a term that is easy to say.  It's very
    >> grade
    >> 9 geometry class. ("Congruent triangles")
    >> Probably it's also the case the native english speakers, if they do not
    >> know
    >> the term well, will assume something inaccurate, while non-native speakers
    >> will go
    >> look it up.
    >>

    > Very open to other suggestions -- we opted for optimizing technical
    > accuracy in descriptiveness. (Carlos, a non-native English speaker, who
    > looks up words in his native languages too)

Yes, so maybe it's not so terrible.  I agree that it's accurate.

    >> terms.  I thought I was going to learn more about in-band/out-of-band from
    >> a
    >> military radio point of view, and/or SS7 vs 2600Hz.
    >>

    > Thank you -- all fixed.

    > We'd welcome a citation from radio and/or SS7 telephony!

I don't have a good one; I didn't live through that.
Fidonet, Xmodem->Zmodem to UUCP to IP for me :-)

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status