Re: [Teas] Questions about the Appendixes to draft-ietf-teas-rfc3272bis

I agree with Joel on deleting as well  Appendix A and B.

Updating Appendix A with history up to the present is almost like bringing
the body back into the Appendix with pointers.

Seems to me as repetitive.

For the SDO list of TE related work as is out of scope as well and it seems
to be stated in the abstract stating latest relevant work in the IETF.

   This work was first published as RFC 3272
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3272> in May 2002.  This
document
   obsoletes RFC 3272 <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3272>
by making a complete update to bring the text in
   line with best current practices for Internet traffic engineering and
   to include references to the latest relevant work in the IETF.

I think it makes sense to delete Appendix B.

Thanks

Gyan

On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 10:19 AM Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:

> Personally, I think we can delete both appendices.  While having an
> historic record is important, the earlier RFC contains that for historic
> purposes.  I do not think that it behooves the community to try to bring
> those two sections up to date, which is what would seem to be required if
> we want to keep them in the document.
>
>
> Yours,
>
> Joel
> On 7/7/2022 6:53 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> We have just one thing remaining after working group last call…
>
>
>
> Don raised some concerns about the Appendixes to this draft and this is an
> attempt to focus the questions and possibly drive answers.
>
>
>
> Appendix A.  Historic Overview
>
>    - Should we delete or retain this Appendix?
>    - If we retain it, should we include some text indicating that it is a
>    subjective view? (If so, what text?)
>    - If we retain it, should we regard it as "History before what is in
>    the body of the text" or should we try to make the history continue towards
>    the present by including pointers back into the body text? (If so, someone
>    is going to need to do that work!)
>    - If we retain it, should we look to fill any gaps between the end of
>    the history documented in the Appendix and the start of the material in the
>    body text?
>
>
>
> Appendix B.  Overview of Traffic Engineering Related Work in Other SDOs
>
>    - Should we delete or retain this Appendix?
>    - If we retain it, should it attempt to list out other (all?) SDOs
>    that have done TE work? (If so, who will try to compile this list?)
>
>
>
> I would really appreciate any thoughts on these points and, depending on
> your answers, some (promises of) text.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Adrian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Teas mailing listTeas@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
>
> _______________________________________________
> Teas mailing list
> Teas@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/teas
>
-- 

<http://www.verizon.com/>

*Gyan Mishra*

*Network Solutions A**rchitect *

*Email gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com <gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com>*

*M 301 502-1347*