Hi Jensen,
Thanks for following up. The Title says the document is about OAM for ALTO protocol, but the Abstract says "operations and management". I prefer the Abstract's choice of words. Thanks for raising this issue. I double-checked RFC6291 (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6291). And I realize that "OAM" is a broader concept than "operations and management". RFC7285 does only use "operations and management". But this document also wants to provide some maintenance functionality, e.g., allowing upgrade of ALTO services. Maybe "O&M" is better? [AF] I think two things: * Pick a term and use it consistently in the document * Spend some time in the Introduction setting out exactly what you mean. I.e., don’t rely on the definition of the term in some other document, but write down what this document actually does. Best, Adrian
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list alto@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
