Looking agin at the document, I have multiple problems with adoption of
this document.
First, as just discussed, it seems to be laying out an archtiecture, but
that architecture is not consistent with the other work going on in the
IETF (specifically in the routing area, and known to many of the
co-authors of this work.)
Second, the document states that it is Informational, and then is
written as if it is defining the one and only way to structure the
needed system.
Third, related to the second, this document seems to assert that there
is a specific and correct way to use IETF technology to solve the
problem. Then, about three quarters of the way through it remembers
that there are multiple alternatives for some parts. The IETF rarely
writes implementation specifications. There are other SDOs that do so.
They can wrestle with the problem of defining something that can be
utilized by multiple operators with varying constraints. Why would we
want to get into trying to have that fight?
For the WG chairs, I am trying to figure out how this even fits the DMM
charter. It is a LOT more than network exposure, which is the closest I
can see in the charter.
Yours, unhappily,
Joel
_______________________________________________
dmm mailing list
dmm@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
