[sfc] Alissa Cooper's Discuss on draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework-13: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

[Alissa Cooper via Datatracker <[e-mail]>]

Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework-13: Discuss

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 3 has "None" in all the cells corresponding to SF and SFC OAM functions.
But then Sections 6.4.1 through 6.4.4 discuss several tools that can be used to
provide some of these functions. I understand that the text about the table
says "Table 3 below is not exhaustive," but still it seems misleading to say
"None" in the table when there are, in fact, tools available that are discussed
just a few paragraphs later.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Section 4.1: "Verify the policy of an SFC or SF." --> This seems a little
vague. What about the policy is meant to be verified?

Section 6: The title of this section threw me off. I would suggest putting
Section 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3 into one section about "Operational Aspects of SFC
OAM at the Service Layer" and then starting a new Section 7 about "Candidate
SFC OAM Tools" that begins with the current Section 6.4 text.

Section 6.1: The normative language seems out of place here.