Agree, OAM has much bigger scope than traceroute, so naming it with 'traceroute considerations' makes more sense. Thanks, Prakash
-----Original Message----- From: lisp <lisp-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Fabio Maino (fmaino) Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 9:06 AM To: lisp@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lisp] New name for upcoming LISP -OAM- document I suggest "Considerations on LISP Mobility, Deployment and Traceroute" that puts a little less emphasis on mobility. I second Luigi's call to get done with this document and move on. Thanks, Fabio On 3/19/18 4:25 PM, Luigi Iannone wrote: > Hi All, > > during today f2f meeting concern has been expressed about the name to use for > the document that will collect what is neither data-plane nor control-plane. > > The name OAM was found not accurate because the document will not cover all > of what is normally in a OAM document. > > The suggested name is “LISP Mobility, Deployment and Traceroute > considerations”. > > The chairs would like to hear from the mailing list if there is any objection > or you have a better name to suggest. > > Please send an email by the end of the week. > > Thanks > > Jole and Luigi > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > lisp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list lisp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list lisp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
