Re: [sfc] The SFC WG has placed draft-wang-sfc-multi-layer-oaminstate"Candidate for WG Adoption"

[<[e-mail]>]

Hi Carlos,







Actually I appreciate the discussion initiated by you, even after the deadline, some of my points are as follow:


1. To the adoption process, I have a different view. I don't think an adopted framework document means something like golden rule, as the chair Joel has indicated in his response "If there are mismatches between this and the adopted working group document, it will be up to the working group to resolve them."


2. To the question whether we need a new protocol for SFC active OAM, my answer is yes, as to whether the new protocol models after MPLS LSP Ping or not, I personally don't care about it.


3. I agree to your point that this draft should mention IOAM. I'd like to see more coorperation, even if compitition always exists.






Best Regards,


Xiao Min







原始邮件



发件人：CarlosPignataro(cpignata) <[e-mail]>
收件人：肖敏10093570;
抄送人：[e-mail] <[e-mail]>;[e-mail] <[e-mail]>;[e-mail] <[e-mail]>;
日 期 ：2018年10月27日 05:35
主 题 ：Re: [sfc]  The SFC WG has placed draft-wang-sfc-multi-layer-oaminstate"Candidate for WG Adoption"


Hi, Xiao Min, 
Thank for for clarifying! I totally missed the “Comments” section including not only the actual “Adoption Call”, but also the deadline!
 
While the deadline passed, as I just learned, I trust you can entertain this follow-up:




As to the already adopted draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework, if I understand it correctly, this draft is informational and  it doesn't raise any practical solution of SFC OAM, so I believe the alignment between draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework and draft-wang-sfc-multi-layer-oam can be done and should be done after the adoption poll conclude.





It really does not matter what the Intended Status of a document versus the other one is… 
 
draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework does not raise solutions *by design* because it is a *framework* document. However, solutions should align to the framework itself.  Clearly, aligning a solution to an existing framework *after* adoption would defeat  its purpose.
 
So, if the framework includes *existing* protocols as parts of it — why does this document invents a new protocol from scratch modeled after MPLS LSP Ping?
 
Xiao, you also wrote this before:


I support WG adotion of this draft, because this work of active OAM is within our charter and complementary with already adopted iOAM.


 
So, for me to understand, I see no mention of IOAM in draft-wang-sfc-multi-layer-oam. What is complementary about it (other than the same complementarity between IOAM and any other OAM solution)?

 


Thanks again, ad apologies for the belated note.
 
— Carlos Pignataro


 
On Oct 26, 2018, at 4:01 AM, [e-mail] wrote:
 


Hi Carlos,


 


I read the clear comment from the chairs Joel and Jim, especially the following words.


-----------------------------------------------------------   snip   -------------------------------------------------------------


This starts a two week call for that adoption.  Please speak up, preferably with supporting explanations, in favor of or opposed to the working group adopting this document.


-----------------------------------------------------------   snap   ------------------------------------------------------------


As to the already adopted draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework, if I understand it correctly, this draft is informational and it  doesn't raise any practical solution of SFC OAM, so I believe the alignment between draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework and draft-wang-sfc-multi-layer-oam can be done and should be done after the adoption  poll conclude.


 


Best Regards,


Xiao Min


 


 




 






发件人：CarlosPignataro(cpignata) <[e-mail]>

收件人：肖敏10093570;

抄送人：[e-mail] <[e-mail]>;[e-mail]  <[e-mail]>;[e-mail] <[e-mail]>;

日 期 ：2018年10月26日 11:35

主 题 ：Re: [sfc]  The SFC WG has placed draft-wang-sfc-multi-layer-oam instate"Candidate for WG Adoption"



Is this an active adoption poll issued by the chairs? Candidate indicates potential or intent, not action, so far as I know. 
As this is being discussed, does this draft conform with the SFC WG adopted OAM framework draft-ietf-sfc-oam-framework?

 


Thanks,
 
— Carlos Pignataro



 
On Oct 10, 2018, at 1:52 AM, [e-mail] wrote:
 


Hi SFC Chairs et al,


 


I support WG adotion of this draft, because this work of active OAM is within our charter and complementary with already adopted iOAM. 


 


Best Regards,


Xiao Min


 


_______________________________________________ sfc mailing list [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc 

 






发件人：IETFSecretariat <[e-mail]>

收件人：[e-mail] <[e-mail]>[e-mail]   <[e-mail]>[e-mail] <[e-mail]>

日 期 ：2018年10月09日 06:20

主 题 ：[sfc] The SFC WG has placed draft-wang-sfc-multi-layer-oam in state"Candidate for WG Adoption"



 The SFC WG has placed draft-wang-sfc-multi-layer-oam in state Candidate for WG Adoption (entered by Joel Halpern) The document is available at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-wang-sfc-multi-layer-oam/ Comment: This document has been presented at several SFC working group sessions.  The authors have asked for Working Group Adoption.  This starts a two week call for that adoption.  Please speak up, preferably with supporting explanations, in favor of or opposed to the working group adopting this document. The last call will end CoB  somewhere 22-October-2018 (e.g. by the time I do anything about it, it will be at least the 23rd everywhere.) Thank you, Joel and Jim _______________________________________________ sfc mailing list [e-mail] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc