[OPSAWG]Re: Fwd: New Liaison Statement, "LS on the new work item ITU-T Q.MUD_IoT “Framework for testing and monitoring IoT devices & networks using technical Requirements from Manufacturer Usage Descr

Mahesh Jethanandani wrote: > Please work with ITU liaison, Scott Mansfield, if the WG thinks a response needs to be sent. >> Body: Abstract: This liaison statement informs ITU-T SG20, ITU-T SG13 >>and IETF that SG11, particularly Q12/11, initiated a new work item: >>ITU-T

[OPSAWG]Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-discardmodel-01.txt

Hi John, I would personally prefer if we use RFC 8791 to model the IM as an abstract data structure. The mapping with JSON will be straightforward per RFC7951. An advantage I see in using 8791 is that related data models can reuse the groupings that can be defined in the parent IM and, thus,

[OPSAWG]Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-discardmodel-01.txt

Hi All, We've checked in an updated version of the draft with the following changes: 1. Incorporating feedback from Qin Wu (thanks!) 2. Clarifying terminology and consistency 2. Adding sub-classes for invalid-label and invalid-sid We would also like to solicit

[OPSAWG]I-D Action: draft-ietf-opsawg-discardmodel-01.txt

Internet-Draft draft-ietf-opsawg-discardmodel-01.txt is now available. It is a work item of the Operations and Management Area Working Group (OPSAWG) WG of the IETF. Title: An Information Model for Packet Discard Reporting Authors: John Evans Oleksandr Pylypenko

[OPSAWG]Re: [IANA #1363824] Expert review for draft-ietf-opsawg-tsvwg-udp-ipfix (ipfix)

Hi Joe, Works for me [1]. Will queue the change for the next iteration. Thank you. Cheers, Med [1] https://github.com/boucadair/udp-ipfix/commit/5d7394f847d45619bd95527f44827fdc5537560c De : to...@strayalpha.com Envoyé : vendredi 24 mai 2024 01:43 À : BOUCADAIR Mohamed INNOV/NET Cc :