Re: [trill] TRILL OAM Framework

Hi,

I have two basic comments to start: 

- The use of the OAM acronym conflicts with the recommendations in RFC
6291 / BCP 161 which recommends the OAM expansion in the IETF documents
to be Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
- 'OAM, in general, covers multiple areas, including: ...' - and then
FCAPS are listed. This is wrong. These are actually not 'aspects of OAM'
but the five functional areas in the OSI model for Network Management
defined in the 80s (ISO/IEC 7498-4). 

I do not know if this confusion between OAM and network management is
intentional or not, but it's a confusion. OAM and Network Management are
different things, there are areas of interaction and relations between
the two, but they need to be kept distinct and such confusions need to
be avoided.  

Regards,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: trill-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:trill-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Samer Salam (ssalam)
> Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2012 3:46 AM
> To: trill@ietf.org
> Cc: Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir); Sam Aldrin
> Subject: [trill] TRILL OAM Framework
> 
> Hi,
> We have published
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-salam-trill-oam-framework which
> describes a proposed reference framework for TRILL OAM. The framework
> leverages concepts widely adopted in 802.1ag, RFC6136, RFC6371, etc...
> 
> We invite and welcome your feedback on the initial draft.
> 
> Thanks
> Samer
> 
> _______________________________________________
> trill mailing list
> trill@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill