Re: [OPSAWG] WG LC: draft-ietf-opsawg-sap

Very last minute review comments.

Thanks for the work on this draft. I think the fundamentals here are useful
and we are referencing this work from the TEAS network slicing work. I also
see it being mentioned in the TEAS packet-optical integration applicability
statement.

Thanks,
Adrian

===

Section 2

You can remove the BCP 14 and the references as you don't use any of the key
words.

---

While the terms UNI and NNI are expanded adequately, I think there is an
assumption that the meanings of the terms are understood by the readers.
Do you have a reference for them you could add?

---

I wonder whether at least one of the CEs in one of the examples should be
dual homed.

---

Section 4

s/seen as an inventory data/seen as inventory data/

---

Figure 7 is somewhat separated from the text that talks about it (starts
"Each SAP is characterized...")

---

I'm not very comfortable about using I-Ds as references in the data model. I
understand that the three cases are all for the definitions of service types
and the references are pretty much for information, but I wonder what
happens to the module if the drafts never become RFCs.

---

-----Original Message-----
From: OPSAWG <opsawg-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Joe Clarke (jclarke)
Sent: 22 April 2022 20:00
To: opsawg@ietf.org
Subject: [OPSAWG] WG LC: draft-ietf-opsawg-sap

Hello, Opsawg.  The last round of comments on this draft have been
discussed/resolved, and we'd like to kick off a three-week WG LC for
this work.  Please provide any and all feedback on list before the end
of the day May 13, 2022.

Authors, if you have suggestions for a good shepherd for this document,
we'd love to hear them.

I have requested reviews from Ops and Routing on this work.

Thanks.

Joe

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg