Dear Thomas,

Thank you very much for the thoughtful feedback. Please know that my late reply 
is in no way a reflection on its importance -- the authors are grateful and 
truly appreciate the time and care you put into your review. 

Speaking also as an individual author, I fully agree with your points and want 
to express my thanks again for your valuable input.

Best,

Carlos.

> On Jul 18, 2025, at 3:43 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
> Dear Tal, Carlos and Adrian,
>  
> As an individual, I have reviewed the latest revision of the document.
>  
> DOCX: 
> https://github.com/network-analytics/ietf-network-analytics-document-status/blob/main/document-review/draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-09.docx
> PDF: 
> https://github.com/network-analytics/ietf-network-analytics-document-status/blob/main/document-review/draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-09.pdf
>  
> Thanks again that you are working on this. This work is much appreciated. As 
> an author, it makes it much more easier when well defined terms can be 
> reused. It fosters a common understanding. I like that the document uses 
> multiple criteria's to describe the application. Section 3.4 describes that 
> well.
>  
> My comments are editorial. Some of them suggest describing also the reasoning.
>  
> Best wishes
> Thomas

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to