Re: [OPSAWG] WG adoption poll for In-Situ OAM drafts

Thanks again, Tianran and Adrian. Please find a couple additional comments inline. — Carlos Pignataro, car...@cisco.com “Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make myself sound more photosynthesis." On Dec 16, 2016, at 1:28 AM, Zhoutianran mailt

Re: [OPSAWG] WG adoption poll for In-Situ OAM drafts

Hi Adrian, Interesting thoughts, please see inline. — Carlos Pignataro, car...@cisco.com “Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make myself sound more photosynthesis." On Dec 15, 2016, at 5:09 PM, Adrian Farrel mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk>> wrote

Re: [OPSAWG] WG adoption poll for In-Situ OAM drafts

Hi, Bert, Please find a couple of follow-ups inline. — Carlos Pignataro, car...@cisco.com “Sometimes I use big words that I do not fully understand, to make myself sound more photosynthesis." On Dec 14, 2016, at 9:48 AM, Bert Wijnen (IETF) mailto:berti...@bwijnen.net>

Re: [OPSAWG] WG adoption poll for In-Situ OAM drafts

Hi, Tianran & Warren, Yes, the WG should adopt these documents, and yes I have read them (and wrote some of them) [NB: I am a co-author] These documents provide a well organized description of an operator-acknowledged problem space / opportunity space, and then follows to defining both data st