Thank you for the comment.  Yan will attempt to address this confusion.  

As shepherd, I'm trying to sort out what specific meets the DISCUSS criteria - 
so I'm looking for clues in all the email from the IESG.  Some of Ignas' 
suggest changes go against previous ADs/WGs comments.

This often happens after time we change a major OPS role.   I just wish these 
drafts had not been delayed from their original IESG review. 

Sue Hares 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ben Campbell [] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 10:34 AM
To: Susan Hares
Cc: The IESG;;;
Subject: Re: Ben Campbell's No Objection on 
draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-08: (with COMMENT)

Specifically, Ignas said:

"It is generally true for the context of the overlay but that is not what the 
document seems to be focusing on. Fabric defines and implements the underlay, 
not the other way around.”

Note that I specifically did not say I “support the discuss”, only that that I 
was confused by the terminology issue he mentioned in his discuss.



> On Apr 3, 2018, at 9:31 PM, Susan Hares <> wrote:
> Ben:
> Could you unpack the "share concern" on definition of fabric comment a bit?
> Sue
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ben Campbell []
> Sent: Tuesday, April 3, 2018 10:26 PM
> To: The IESG
> Cc:; Susan Hares; 
> Subject: Ben Campbell's No Objection on 
> draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-08: (with COMMENT)
> Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
> draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-dc-fabric-network-topology-08: No Objection
> 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
> for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
> The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> I share Ignas's concern about the definition of "fabric". Otherwise, I have a 
> couple of nits:
> Abstract: Missing article before "Data Center Network".
> §2: Please use the boilerplate from RFC 8174 rather than rolling your own 
> text to constrain the keywords to their all-caps forms.

i2rs mailing list

Reply via email to