Hi, I support adopting this ID as a WG document. As the editor of the PCE TC MIB and of the PCE DISC MIB I have de facto experimented it and consider that a manageability section should be added to any I-D: It permits the editor to start the editing earlier than previously; It gives straight forward directions to the editors and weighs clearly the management options; The scope of theses sections is wider than MIB editing and covers any kind of management interfaces; As MIB editing is a real mystery for protocols geeks, this draft provides them with guidance to extract and to structure the manageability requirements of the protocol they are specifying. Regards Emile ________________________________
De : JP Vasseur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoyé : vendredi 12 janvier 2007 20:29 À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Fwd: [Pce] WG Feed-back required ondraft-farrel-pce-manageability-requirements-02.txt Dear WG, We had so far a few (and positive) feed-backs, it would be nice to get more feed-back on this (in particular several of the usual contributors haven't expressed their opinion). Thanks. Happy New Year to all of you. JP. Begin forwarded message: From: JP Vasseur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: January 3, 2007 1:12:59 PM EST To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: "Dan \(\(Dan\)\) Romascanu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Pce] WG Feed-back required on draft-farrel-pce-manageability-requirements-02.txt Dear WG, The idea of adding a Manageability section to IDs was first introduced by Adrian and discussed at IETF-65 Dallas March 2006 (for reference, see the WG minutes) since then two revisions of draft-farrel-pce-manageability-requirements have been published based on the comments received from members of the PCE WG and OPS ADs. My recollection of the discussions about this ID is a general good support from members of the PCE WG and OPS AD (thanks to Dan for his help). The were some concerns from Lou that have been addressed in the latest revision of the draft. Furthermore, there are several IDs in the works for which the authors agreed to add a manageability section and "experiment" the process that may have to be tuned as we'll move forward. Because, this ID does have some implication on (current and future) PCE WG IDs, I'd welcome feed-back on adopting this ID as a WG document. Thanks. JP. _______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
_______________________________________________ Pce mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce
