Document: draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization Title: Guidelines for Characterizing "OAM" Reviewer: Robert Sparks Review result: Ready
I've chosen "Ready" specifically scoped to this being an ART Area Review team response. There are no ART area specific concerns to address in the draft. I don't object to this draft going forward, but as an individual participant I also don't support it. I don't see it making the conversations around the topics easier or clearer, but I also don't see that it will make things worse beyond befuddled conversation participants having one more document to read. There appears to be support from people having conversations on these topics at the moment, so I'm probably in the rough (though I see Tim's OPSDIR review and I have a lot of sympathy for it). I don't agree with this kind of use of the BCP subseries, but that's already established. I remember going through the approval process for RFC6291 and this is giving me unpleasant flashbacks. I hope the current IESG has an easier time of it. _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
