Just a short clarification on one point (or two). See in text.
Regards, Dan > 3. On the other hand I am missing the relationship with other work items in > the >> BIER charter - there is no manageability section for example, there is no >> reference to the performance impact in networks. Maybe these are dealt with >> in >> a different document or documents or BIER, if so it would be good at least to >> mention and reference these here. >> >> >> There is no requirement to include a manageability section. >> >> I believe there is ongoing work having to do with Operations and >> Management of BIER, but as that does not help to understand the >> architecture (or forwarding procedures), I don't think it would be >> appropriate to reference that work. >> > > Yes, OAM is in charter & document for it exists. I see nothing wrong with > referencing it but I don't think it needs a manageability section. > > >> >> 5. Sections 3 to 6 mentioned repeatedly provisioning. As there is no >> Operations >> and Manageability section as in many other Routing Area documents, it is not >> clear how this is expected to happen. >> >> >> How OAM is "expected to happen" would be outside the scope of this >> document. >> > > The "provisioning" language is unfortunate. We could (and maybe should) > replace it simply with "MUST support" rather than "be able to be > provisioned" and be done. Whether it's a controller, IGP signalling or > anything else is irrelevant to BIER architecture. > > Please make a distinction between Operations and Management, and OAM (Operations, Administration, Maintenance) as per RFC 6291. OAM is just one of the aspects of Operations and Management. While a dedicated section on Operations and Manageability considerations is not mandatory, it is part of many documents in the Routing Area. I hold the opinion that from operators perspective operational and manageability aspects are core and should be dealt with in architecture and protocol documents. Of course, as Gen-ART comments are written for the benefit of the IESG and especially for the IETF chair, it's up to them to consider or discard these comments. Note also that I marked them as 'minor' so they are not show-stoppers IMO. Regards,
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
