Thank you Loa for reviewing this document again! Much appreciated. Please find some follow-ups inline below
On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 3:46 AM Loa Andersson <l...@pi.nu> wrote: > Working Group, Carlos, and Adrian, > > The way I understood draft-pignataro-opsawg-oam-whaaat-question-mark, is > that > while it updates RFC 6291, the updates are only additions, is that > correctly > understood? > CMP: Correct. > > You give the guidance: > > The guidance in this document is to avoid the terms "*-band" and > instead find finer-granularity descriptive terms. The definitions > presented in this document are for use in all future IETF documents > that refer to OAM, and the terms "in-band OAM" and "out-of-band OAM" > are not to be used in future documents. > > You mean that there is no need to go back and update old documents, e.g. > the MPLS WG has a handful of documents with *-band" in the title. > If we don't update them for some other reason? If so I support this. > CMP: Correct. > > Some small nits > > - I think we should follow the RFC Editor, OAM is an abbreviation, not an > acronym. Yes I know I had it wrong in RFC 6291, and if you want to make > that update I'm all for it. > CMP: Good question. I believe OAM is an initialism within abbreviations. I would like the RFC Editor to provide this guidance at the right time. > > - you say: [RFC9197] currently uses the acronym "IOAM" for In Situ > Operations, Administration, and Maintenance. While this document > does not obsolete that acronym, it still recommends that "In situ > OAM" is used instead to avoid potential ambiguity. > > "Currently there are 7 RFCs that have the abbreviation IOAM in the title, > RFC 9197, RFC 9322, RFC 9326, RFC 9359, RFC 9378, RFC 9452, and RFC 9486, > I suspect there are more that have IOAM in the body. > > You might want to make this a more general guidance than just to refer > to RFC 9197. > CMP: Done. "RFC 9197 and other dependent documents" > > I also think we should make "OAM" well-known, so we don't have to expand > it when we use e.g. "In situ OAM" in a title. > > Other than that I support adopting the draft as a working group draft. > > CMP: Thanks! Carlos. > > /Loa > > -- > Loa Andersson > Senior MPLS Expert > Bronze Dragon Consulting > l...@pi.nu > loa.pi....@mail.com > > > >
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
