Thanks for this discussion, and seems to start converging. Other thoughts?
Best, Carlos. > On Jan 21, 2026, at 10:57 AM, Gunter van de Velde (Nokia) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Inline: GV> > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2026 10:03 AM > To: Gunter van de Velde (Nokia) <[email protected]>; Carlos > Pignataro <[email protected]> > Cc: The IESG <[email protected]>; Benoit Claise <[email protected]>; > [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected] > Subject: RE: Gunter Van de Velde's Discuss on > draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-15: (with DISCUSS) > > Re-, > > I don't have an issue with the compliance statement, Gunter. That’s a great > comment. > > My comment is more on the applicability part of your comment, especially the > following: > >>> GV> assuming there is agreement on "compliance statement" one >>> could simply say: >>> "The guidelines apply to documents that have the compliance >> statement >>> (section 3.7)" > > I think that having text similar to the blob I shared is better to address > this part of your comment. > > GV> agree. Thanks > > G/ > > Cheers, > Med > >> -----Message d'origine----- >> De : Gunter van de Velde (Nokia) <[email protected]> >> Envoyé : mercredi 21 janvier 2026 09:43 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed >> INNOV/NET <[email protected]>; Carlos Pignataro >> <[email protected]> Cc : The IESG <[email protected]>; Benoit Claise >> <[email protected]>; Benoit Claise <benoit@everything- >> ops.net>; [email protected]; opsawg- >> [email protected]; [email protected] Objet : RE: Gunter Van de Velde's >> Discuss on draft-ietf-opsawg- >> oam-characterization-15: (with DISCUSS) >> >> >> Hi Med, >> >> There is merit in this text blob, but how does one know when reading, >> lets say in 3 years, a novel RFC and understand if the used >> terminology definitions came from draft-ietf-opsawg-oam- >> characterization or not? (i.e. maybe this rfc was already in rfc >> editor queue or part of a cluster and published with delay?) >> >> Without an explicit compliance statement it is unclear what exact >> terminology definition is applied. Using a compliance statement looks >> simple and it is 100% accurate. Unsure I understand the concern >> against a compliance statement? >> >> Be well, >> G/ >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2026 8:58 AM >> To: Gunter van de Velde (Nokia) <[email protected]>; >> Carlos Pignataro <[email protected]> >> Cc: The IESG <[email protected]>; Benoit Claise >> <[email protected]>; Benoit Claise <benoit@everything- >> ops.net>; [email protected]; opsawg- >> [email protected]; [email protected] >> Subject: RE: Gunter Van de Velde's Discuss on draft-ietf-opsawg- >> oam-characterization-15: (with DISCUSS) >> >> Hi Gunter, all, >> >> For the applicability point you mentioned below, the intent is that, >> unless there are valid reasons, OAM-related documents that the IETF >> will produce after the publication of this document should follow the >> guidance. >> >> This is not different from how similar BCPs are scoped. For example, >> BCP 166 >> (https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffra >> 01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com%2F%3Furl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%25252&d >> ata=05%7C02%7Cgunter.van_de_velde%40nokia.com%7C45440ea648ef424ca0df08 >> de58cbeabc%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C63904583002864 >> 6776%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwM >> CIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata >> =N8j9jgfxCt3D5xOWM1Vi5W6iJbQEzdBj4JtvhBm%2F7Ms%3D&reserved=0 >> Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fhtml%2Frfc6365%23section- >> 1.1&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7Cc236dee9199448 >> 2d89b308de58c92414%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C63 >> 9045818092886841%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsI >> lYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3 >> D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=29jx9FZ9x05xhaDh6BZrlizOVlknSYdTVSYerFvNOQA%3 >> D&reserved=0) includes the following: >> >> The definitions here SHOULD be used by IETF standards. IETF >> standards that explicitly want to create different definitions for >> the terms defined here can do so, but unless an alternate >> definition >> is provided the definitions of the terms in this document apply. >> IETF standards that have a requirement for different definitions >> are >> encouraged, for clarity's sake, to find terms different than the >> ones >> defined here. >> >> If this helps, similar text can be considered for this document. >> >> Thank you. >> >> Cheers, >> Med >> >>> -----Message d'origine----- >>> De : Gunter van de Velde (Nokia) >>> <[email protected]> >>> Envoyé : mercredi 21 janvier 2026 06:01 À : Carlos Pignataro >>> <[email protected]> Cc : The IESG <[email protected]>; Benoit >> Claise >>> <[email protected]>; Benoit Claise <benoit@everything- >>> ops.net>; [email protected]; >> opsawg- >>> [email protected]; [email protected] Objet : RE: Gunter Van de >> Velde's >>> Discuss on draft-ietf-opsawg- >>> oam-characterization-15: (with DISCUSS) >>> >>> >>> Hi Carlos, >>> >>> Hope this mail finds you well. >>> >>> See inline: GV> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Carlos Pignataro <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2026 6:19 PM >>> To: Gunter van de Velde (Nokia) <[email protected]> >>> Cc: The IESG <[email protected]>; Benoit Claise >>> <[email protected]>; Benoit Claise <benoit@everything- >>> ops.net>; [email protected]; >> opsawg- >>> [email protected]; [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: Gunter Van de Velde's Discuss on draft-ietf-opsawg- >>> oam-characterization-15: (with DISCUSS) >>> >>> Hi, Gunter, >>> >>> Thank you for this two-part DISCUSS, which I find super useful. >>> >>>> # I think the draft is well written and conveys great value. >>> >>> >>> Thank you for your general observation as well! >>> >>> 1. >>>> ##Would it be useful to introduce a simple “compliance >>> statement” in >>>> future drafts—perhaps in the terminology section—indicating >> that >>> the >>>> document aligns with this BCP? This could be similar in spirit >>> to how >>>> BCP 14 is referenced today and would make the level of >> adherence >>> explicit. >>> >>> YES! I think this is a fantastic idea. If others find this >> suggestion >>> useful, I would add a new Section 3.7, compliance statement, >> including >>> something like "Authors who follow the terms as defined in this >>> document should incorporate this phrase in a terminology >> section: ‘OAM >>> terms … are to be interpreted as described in BCP …" >>> >>> GV> Thanks. I'll wait to see how this spins out from consensus >>> GV> perspective >>> >>> 2. >>>> ## The document states that the guidelines apply to “future” >>>> documents, but I am not sure that the term future is very >>> precise. >>>> What is considered future today may already be history in a >>> short time. >>> >>> Future is intended to mean documents to be approved after the >>> publication of this BCP. What’s the best way to word that? For >>> example, should not affect documents in the RFC Ed queue. >>> >>> GV> assuming there is agreement on "compliance statement" one >>> could simply say: >>> "The guidelines apply to documents that have the compliance >> statement >>> (section 3.7)" >>> >>> Be well, >>> G/ >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Carlos. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 20, 2026, at 1:34 PM, Gunter Van de Velde via >> Datatracker >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Gunter Van de Velde has entered the following ballot position >>> for >>>> draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-15: Discuss >>>> >>>> When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply >>> to all >>>> email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to >>> cut >>>> this introductory paragraph, however.) >>>> >>>> >>>> Please refer to >>>> >>> >> https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffra0 >> 1.safelinks.protection.outlook.com%2F%3Furl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252F&dat >> a=05%7C02%7Cgunter.van_de_velde%40nokia.com%7C45440ea648ef424ca0df08de >> 58cbeabc%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C6390458300287219 >> 02%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCI >> sIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=8 >> wH6rU4lC0g4K1%2FD2gQR%2FZDMquOlUlLImBvjIIAtqic%3D&reserved=0 >> fra0 >>> >> %2F&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7Cc236dee9199448 >> 2d89 >>> >> b308de58c92414%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639045 >> 8180 >>> >> 92928107%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwL >> jAuM >>> >> DAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C% >> 7C&s >>> data=0xlF4kxr7gZraOwO8U370ut5nraFt7eYe5DHGJBrX1Y%3D&reserved=0 >>> >> 1.safelinks.protection.outlook.com%2F%3Furl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252F >> &dat >>> >> a=05%7C02%7Cgunter.van_de_velde%40nokia.com%7C5e55bdde90ad49388115 >> 08de >>> >> 58c2ecb6%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C639045791379 >> 2268 >>> >> 45%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDA >> wMCI >>> >> sIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sda >> ta=y >>> kCbTXnvTsbYjMAWmkF6N%2F%2FeHK10w7wlKzvG6gk6V18%3D&reserved=0 >>> www. >>>> ietf.org%2Fabout%2Fgroups%2Fiesg%2Fstatements%2Fhandling- >> ballot- >>> posi&d >>>> >>> >> ata=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C6fbf0d74d0004f5090f >>> d08d >>>> >>> >> e58aa195d%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C63904568475 >>> 6643 >>>> >>> >> 630%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMD >>> AwMC >>>> >>> >> IsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sd >>> ata= >>>> 46mlQYXa7ZsORr8%2FdPujJe6UOetsGdDYfKOlU4Z14Zg%3D&reserved=0 >>>> tions/ for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and >>> COMMENT >>>> positions. >>>> >>>> >>>> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found >>> here: >>>> >>> >> https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffra0 >> 1.safelinks.protection.outlook.com%2F%3Furl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252F&dat >> a=05%7C02%7Cgunter.van_de_velde%40nokia.com%7C45440ea648ef424ca0df08de >> 58cbeabc%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C6390458300287947 >> 23%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCI >> sIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=J >> u2kpKROGnUlV5eF5DPoSzoOJwfvVys%2FTBGird22o%2BM%3D&reserved=0 >> fra0 >>> >> %2F&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7Cc236dee9199448 >> 2d89 >>> >> b308de58c92414%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639045 >> 8180 >>> >> 92953483%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwL >> jAuM >>> >> DAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C% >> 7C&s >>> >> data=BVg2R6UUf3uI5F%2Fxw2I%2FHU4Ed%2FEeVjGbk7vmeywWky8%3D&reserved >> =0 >>> >> 1.safelinks.protection.outlook.com%2F%3Furl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252F >> &dat >>> >> a=05%7C02%7Cgunter.van_de_velde%40nokia.com%7C5e55bdde90ad49388115 >> 08de >>> >> 58c2ecb6%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C639045791379 >> 2618 >>> >> 18%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDA >> wMCI >>> >> sIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sda >> ta=j >>> BxEOPiSGPrQN6azGw%2BoK51C9R%2BMwIjpK5ysGU9rlQA%3D&reserved=0 >>> data >>>> tracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fdraft-ietf-opsawg-oam- >>> characterizatio&data=05 >>>> >>> >> %7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C6fbf0d74d0004f5090fd08de5 >>> 8aa1 >>>> >>> >> 95d%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C63904568475665774 >>> 8%7C >>>> >>> >> Unknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIs >>> IlAi >>>> >>> >> OiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=gg >>> 7ZX3 >>>> 3ofeZeUKNUUjwDKVtFXNdGrB0Ay2Yuv7aZ4OA%3D&reserved=0 >>>> n/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------- >> -- >>> ------ >>>> DISCUSS: >>>> -------------------------------------------------------------- >> -- >>> ------ >>>> >>>> # Gunter Van de Velde, RTG AD, comments for >>>> draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-15 >>>> >>>> # The line numbers used are rendered from IETF idnits tool: >>>> >>> >> https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffra0 >> 1.safelinks.protection.outlook.com%2F%3Furl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252F&dat >> a=05%7C02%7Cgunter.van_de_velde%40nokia.com%7C45440ea648ef424ca0df08de >> 58cbeabc%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C6390458300288576 >> 84%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCI >> sIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=r >> E7iCqQtC7XWpVxJAkqeeNoykRe2miE3q3aBCpv9MY8%3D&reserved=0 >> fra0 >>> >> %2F&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7Cc236dee9199448 >> 2d89 >>> >> b308de58c92414%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C639045 >> 8180 >>> >> 92973743%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwL >> jAuM >>> >> DAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C% >> 7C&s >>> data=CMlA4OTqwLVy0BtxmDaCUwPmGg0QXzy3YD85eVnNwqA%3D&reserved=0 >>> >> 1.safelinks.protection.outlook.com%2F%3Furl%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252F >> &dat >>> >> a=05%7C02%7Cgunter.van_de_velde%40nokia.com%7C5e55bdde90ad49388115 >> 08de >>> >> 58c2ecb6%7C5d4717519675428d917b70f44f9630b0%7C0%7C0%7C639045791379 >> 2825 >>> >> 61%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDA >> wMCI >>> >> sIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sda >> ta=B >>> qaLqGYMKXVZ1lVkvAMCi8ER0IdwOsiqwKz1u0ZPg3k%3D&reserved=0 >>> auth >>>> or- >>> >> tools.ietf.org%2Fapi%2Fidnits%3Furl%3Dhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.ietf.org%2 >>> F >>>> >>> >> arch&data=05%7C02%7Cmohamed.boucadair%40orange.com%7C6fbf0d74d0004 >>> f509 >>>> >>> >> 0fd08de58aa195d%7C90c7a20af34b40bfbc48b9253b6f5d20%7C0%7C0%7C63904 >>> 5684 >>>> >>> >> 756667024%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIw >>> LjAu >>>> >>> >> MDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C >>> %7C& >>>> >> sdata=W7HCWPuDewlYXEEMcwS6i4dI9HrMdbEQZhM83dGSiuU%3D&reserved=0 >>>> ive/id/draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-15.txt >>>> >>>> # Many thanks to Mach Chen for the RTGDIR IETF Last Call >> Review >>>> >>>> # I think the draft is well written and conveys great value. >>>> >>>> # Please find two DISCUSS observations i had when processing >> the >>> document. >>>> >>>> # DISCUSS >>>> # ======== >>>> >>>> # Are there guidelines for documents that intentionally do not >>> follow >>>> the proposal? >>>> >>>> ##The proposed changes in this document are clearly relevant >> for >>> OAM documents. >>>> I can see the merit in having a single, uniform definition of >>> the >>>> terminology, but I wonder whether it is really necessary for >> the >>>> definitions to be identical in all cases, across every context >>> and for every application or service. >>>> >>>> ##Would it be useful to introduce a simple “compliance >>> statement” in >>>> future drafts—perhaps in the terminology section—indicating >> that >>> the >>>> document aligns with this BCP? This could be similar in spirit >>> to how >>>> BCP 14 is referenced today and would make the level of >> adherence >>> explicit. >>>> >>>> # Clarifying what “future documents” means >>>> >>>> ## The document states that the guidelines apply to “future” >>>> documents, but I am not sure that the term future is very >>> precise. >>>> What is considered future today may already be history in a >>> short time. >>>> >>>> ## Would it be clearer to say that the guidelines apply to >>> documents >>>> published after this BCP is published, or to documents that >>> include a >>>> normative reference to it? More specifically, is the >> expectation >>> that >>>> documents currently in progress, possibly even those already >> in >>> the >>>> RFC Editor queue, are required to adopt this terminology, or >> is >>> the >>>> intent only to guide new work from the point of publication >>> onward? >>>> >>>> Thanks for this write-up. >>>> >>>> Gunter Van de Velde >>>> RTG Area Director >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> __________________________________________________________________ >> __________________________________________ >> Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations >> confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, >> exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message >> par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi >> que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles >> d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete >> altere, deforme ou falsifie. >> Merci. >> >> This message and its attachments may contain confidential or >> privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not >> be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. >> If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and >> delete this message and its attachments. >> As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have >> been modified, changed or falsified. >> Thank you. > ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations > confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, > exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par > erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les > pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, > Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou > falsifie. Merci. > > This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged > information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, > used or copied without authorisation. > If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete > this message and its attachments. > As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been > modified, changed or falsified. > Thank you.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
