:-) Henk, just submitted a draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-00 unchanged (except for filename and version) from the individual -03.
After approved, happy to submit a 01 with all the wg discussion captured and addressed. Thanks, Carlos. > On May 10, 2024, at 9:08β―AM, Henk Birkholz <henk.birkholz@ietf.contact> wrote: > > FYI, I found the I-D Action notif. My intricate web of shiny sieve filters is > to blame (which unfortunately inhibits me from shifting blame from me to > mailman anymore. Mailman is fine). > > On 10.05.24 15:03, Henk Birkholz wrote: >> Oh I see, DT tells me it is at -05 already. >> Well, there was no notification on i-d-annou...@ietf.org AFAICS (but there >> were some mailman transition snafus recently, so I'll just account that >> under the German expression "tja"). I'd have commented on a -04 submission, >> if I would have seen an email. >> Nothing to worry about, though, and no need to hassle already busy >> Secretariat with that. Just submit -03 as the new -00 and replay the diff >> between -03 to -05 as a new diff from -00 to 01 and we are good. >> As Joe just highlighted, any pending submission of >> draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-00 can be canceled - and I just did >> that. So you are good to go. >> Viele GrΓΌΓe, >> Henk >> On 10.05.24 14:46, Adrian Farrel wrote: >>> Hmmm, did Carlos jump the gun? Don't you hate enthusiastic people? >>> >>> If so, do you want us to undo the changes? Options would be: >>> - Ask the Secretariat to unpost the latest revision >>> - Post a change-back version of the draft >>> >>> Alternative is that "we" suck it up. >>> - You post email to say, all changes made addressed only the adoption poll >>> comments >>> - You accept the adoption and we follow up per Carlos' plan >>> >>> Let us know. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> A >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Henk Birkholz <henk.birkholz@ietf.contact> >>> Sent: 10 May 2024 13:43 >>> To: Carlos Pignataro <cpign...@gmail.com>; adr...@olddog.co.uk >>> Cc: OPSAWG <opsawg@ietf.org> >>> Subject: Re: [OPSAWG]Re: π WG Adoption Call for >>> draft-pignataro-opsawg-oam-whaaat-question-mark-03 >>> >>> Hi Carlos, >>> hi Adrian, >>> >>> please do it the other way around βΊοΈ >>> >>> The chairs ask the authors to first rename >>> draft-pignataro-opsawg-oam-whaaat-question-mark-03 to >>> draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-00, keeping the content as is, >>> and resubmit. And then post a -01 that addresses all discussion so far, >>> as these represent WG feedback already. >>> >>> >>> For the OPSAWG co-chairs, >>> >>> Henk >>> >>> On 09.05.24 03:08, Carlos Pignataro wrote: >>>> Thank you, Henk, for the descriptive and thorough wrap of this adoption >>>> call. >>>> >>>> Like Adrian, I'm also inclined to align with your conclusions, including: >>>> >>>> * "draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization" WFM -- even when it is much >>>> _less_ expressive than the original, IMO ;-) >>>> * As the other one of the editors, ofc more than happy to commit to, >>>> seek, and follow the WG on the 'pro-active alignment'. >>>> (understanding we are at a starting point in which the relevant >>>> lexicon is 'reactively misaligned', or otherwise we would not need >>>> this draft.) >>>> >>>> Net-net: All sounds good with thanks! >>>> >>>> I can post a rev++ addressing all discussion thus far, and then an >>>> unchanged draft-ietf-opsawg-...-00 >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> >>>> Carlos. >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 4:14β―AM Adrian Farrel <adr...@olddog.co.uk >>>> <mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Thanks Henk, >>>> >>>> Apologies for the fatuous original name of this draft (but it worked >>>> to get everyone's attention ;-) >>>> >>>> - Yes, your suggested new name works for me. >>>> >>>> - Since you ask, as one of the editors, I commit to a "pro-active >>>> alignment", making changes as requested by the WG, and paying >>>> attention to any sources of similar terminology pointed out to us. >>>> >>>> Ciao, >>>> Adrian >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Henk Birkholz <henk.birkholz@ietf.contact> >>>> Sent: 08 May 2024 08:50 >>>> To: OPSAWG <opsawg@ietf.org <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>> >>>> Subject: [OPSAWG]Re: π WG Adoption Call for >>>> draft-pignataro-opsawg-oam-whaaat-question-mark-03 >>>> >>>> Dear OPSAWG members, >>>> >>>> this email concludes the 1st call for Working Group Adoption for >>>> draft-pignataro-opsawg-oam-whaaat-question-mark-03. >>>> >>>> We received a healthy number of replies, including a good discussion >>>> about "yet another set of terminology" and its intrinsic >>>> usefulness/feasibility in the IETF. A good example reflecting the >>>> overall discussion is the existing terminology established in the >>>> DetNet >>>> WG and published in RFC 9551. >>>> >>>> The chairs discussed the inputs and comments and believe this work >>>> to be >>>> feasible to be adopted as a working group I-D. This believe includes >>>> the >>>> expectation that no inconsistencies are introduced by this work and >>>> the >>>> authors, editors, and contributors commit to a pro-active alignment >>>> (scope and relationship of terms and their use in the respective >>>> ecosystems) with other existing bodies of work that is brought to >>>> attention in OPSAWG or otherwise. >>>> >>>> Typically, we would now ask to rename and resubmit as is. Alas, >>>> there is >>>> the inconsistency between draft name and draft title. Some concern >>>> about >>>> that naming was raised during the WGLC. While the draft name was fine >>>> for the individual submission, the chairs tend to agree that a more >>>> expressive draft name would benefit the work. Could the authors please >>>> work with the WG to come up with a better draft name? We can kick this >>>> off with a proposal from chairs: how about >>>> draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization? Please bash, so we can move >>>> forward. The chairs assume that this naming exercise can be resolved >>>> quickly. >>>> >>>> >>>> For the OPSAWG co-chairs, >>>> >>>> Henk >>>> >>>> On 10.04.24 13:05, Henk Birkholz wrote: >>>> > Dear OPSAWG members, >>>> > >>>> > this email starts a call for Working Group Adoption of >>>> > >>>> >> >>>> >>>> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-pignataro-opsawg-oam-whaaat-question-mark-03.html >>>> >>>> <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-pignataro-opsawg-oam-whaaat-question-mark-03.html> >>>> > >>>> > ending on Thursday, May 2nd. >>>> > >>>> > As a reminder, this I-D summarizes how the term "Operations, >>>> > Administration, and Maintenance" (OAM) is used currently & >>>> historically >>>> > in the IETF and intends to consolidate unambiguous and protocol >>>> agnostic >>>> > terminology for OAM. The summary includes descriptions of narrower >>>> > semantics introduced by added qualifications the term OAM and a >>>> list of >>>> > common capabilities that can be found in nodes processing OAM >>>> packets. >>>> > >>>> > The chairs acknowledge a positive poll result at IETF119, but >>>> there has >>>> > not been much discussion on the list yet. We would like to gather >>>> > feedback from the WG if there is interest to further contribute and >>>> > review. As a potential enabler for discussions, this call will last >>>> > three weeks. >>>> > >>>> > Please reply with your support and especially any substantive >>>> comments >>>> > you may have. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > For the OPSAWG co-chairs, >>>> > >>>> > Henk >>>> > >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > OPSAWG mailing list >>>> > OPSAWG@ietf.org <mailto:OPSAWG@ietf.org> >>>> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg >>>> <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org> >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org >>>> <mailto:opsawg-le...@ietf.org> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org> >>>> To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org >>>> <mailto:opsawg-le...@ietf.org> >>>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
