IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSAWG] WGLC on draft-ietf-opsawg-mpls-tp-oam-def

"Bert (IETF) Wijnen" <bertietf@bwijnen.net> Wed, 02 February 2011 10:29 UTC

Return-Path: <bertietf@bwijnen.net>
X-Original-To: opsawg@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 723C83A6C59 for <opsawg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Feb 2011 02:29:07 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.55
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.55 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.049, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zanlbHcAW3Yd for <opsawg@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Feb 2011 02:29:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from postgirl.ripe.net (postgirl.ipv6.ripe.net [IPv6:2001:610:240:11::c100:1342]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29F303A6C48 for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Feb 2011 02:29:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dodo.ripe.net ([193.0.23.4]) by postgirl.ripe.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bertietf@bwijnen.net>) id 1Pka0c-0000mB-Kj; Wed, 02 Feb 2011 11:32:24 +0100
Received: from dog.ripe.net ([193.0.1.217] helo=BWMACBOOK.local) by dodo.ripe.net with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <bertietf@bwijnen.net>) id 1Pka0c-0001xw-FW; Wed, 02 Feb 2011 11:32:22 +0100
Message-ID: <4D4932B6.60401@bwijnen.net>
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 11:32:22 +0100
From: "Bert (IETF) Wijnen" <bertietf@bwijnen.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Scott O. Bradner" <sob@harvard.edu>
References: <20110131144045.DB27081B75B@newdev.eecs.harvard.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20110131144045.DB27081B75B@newdev.eecs.harvard.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-RIPE-Spam-Level: --
X-RIPE-Spam-Report: Spam Total Points: -2.9 points pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- ------------------------------------ -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000]
X-RIPE-Signature: 86ab03e524994f79ca2c75a176445dd43a820505d29263a532073e4a1dc6c553
Cc: opsawg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] WGLC on draft-ietf-opsawg-mpls-tp-oam-def
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 10:29:07 -0000

I basically support this document.

Here are some review comments/questions

1. In section 1 I see:

        The examples below show a number of different ways that the OAM
        acronym has been expanded in previous documents.

    So are those "prvious" documents meant to be just IETF documents, or
    also non-IETF documents. And I guess we want to streamline our (IETF)
    use of these terms, but I bet we have very little (if any) influence on what
    other organisations do with this term. Would be good to be explicit on
    these aspects.

    Same for the recommendations. Are they specific for use in IETF documents,
    or are we suggesting it for wider applicability. Better to be specific I think.

2. I am not sure that the document is clear in how/where I should categorize/put
     CONFIGURATION. For example Netconf? Is that part of OAM? There is some
     configuration listed under "Maintenance" on page 7.
     I can see it can also be used for Provisioning.
     And then there is FCAPS, where it could fall under the C.

Bert


On 1/31/11 3:40 PM, Scott O. Bradner wrote:
> I should have done this right after the last IETF meeting
> but, in any case, this message starts a WGLC on
> draft-ietf-opsawg-mpls-tp-oam-def - please let the
> list know if you think the ID is ready for publication
> as a BCP
>
> thanks
>
> Scott
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> OPSAWG@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email