Re: [Teas] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model-09: (with COMMENT)

Leeyoung <> Thu, 21 June 2018 13:24 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF122130E3B; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 06:24:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.199
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qKMDNIAOoY8H; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 06:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D9EA130E2B; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 06:24:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown []) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id 246DEB3765673; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:24:13 +0100 (IST)
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.382.0; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 14:24:14 +0100
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0382.000; Thu, 21 Jun 2018 06:24:07 -0700
From: Leeyoung <>
To: =?utf-8?B?TWlyamEgS8O8aGxld2luZA==?= <>, The IESG <>
CC: "" <>, "" <>, "" <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: =?utf-8?B?W1RlYXNdIE1pcmphIEvDvGhsZXdpbmQncyBObyBPYmplY3Rpb24gb24gZHJh?= =?utf-8?Q?ft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model-09:_(with_COMMENT)?=
Thread-Index: AQHUCVa71qsrmzeByUiqMSCeCeFnnaRqr+ZA
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 13:24:07 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Teas] =?utf-8?q?Mirja_K=C3=BChlewind=27s_No_Objection_on_draft-?= =?utf-8?q?ietf-teas-actn-info-model-09=3A_=28with_COMMENT=29?=
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: Traffic Engineering Architecture and Signaling working group discussion list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 13:24:21 -0000

Hi Mirja,

Thank you for providing good comments. Those terms are defined in RFC 7926. In Section 1.1 Terminology Section, we can make it more explicit. 
How these elements are identified by is not the scope of the info model. But they would matter in the data model and protocol extensions. 

Best regards,

-----Original Message-----
From: Teas [] On Behalf Of Mirja Kühlewind
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2018 6:55 AM
To: The IESG <>
Subject: [Teas] Mirja Kühlewind's No Objection on draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model-09: (with COMMENT)

Mirja Kühlewind has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-teas-actn-info-model-09: No Objection

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
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:


The document does not really specify what a <Path>, or <VN link>, or <VN node> actually is... are those elements identified by IP addresses or something else, or does that not really matter?

Teas mailing list