Loa - I agree with you that simply "IS-IS Support" may not be the best choice. Although, the meeting minutes have not yet been posted, as I recall my response to Tony Li's suggestion of "IS-IS Support" was "Yes - something like that."
The draft authors have not yet discussed this - but we will and share the proposed new name. Other suggestions welcomed. Les > -----Original Message----- > From: Lsr <lsr-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Loa Andersson > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 2:06 AM > To: lsr@ietf.org > Subject: [Lsr] Question on draft-qgp-lsr-isis-pics-yang > > Working Group, > > During the presentation of draft-qgp-lsr-isis-pics-yang there was a > rather strong opposition in the chat against using the ISO-term "PICS" > in an IETF document. > > I think the term "Support" was suggested (excuse me if I missed > something), but I'm not that impressed, and would rather like to see > something like - "Supported Protocol Aspects". > > /Loa > -- > Loa Andersson email: l...@pi.nu > Senior MPLS Expert loa.pi...@gmail.com > Bronze Dragon Consulting phone: +46 739 81 21 64 > > _______________________________________________ > Lsr mailing list > Lsr@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr _______________________________________________ Lsr mailing list Lsr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lsr
