Thank you Justin for the comments. Good catch.

Fixed (diff with also the other changes): 
https://author-tools.ietf.org/diff?doc_1=draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-10&url_2=https://raw.githubusercontent.com/network-analytics/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry/d0c256ba07cf8b7849887104f2a50a73482c4486/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-11.txt

The -11 iteration: 
https://github.com/network-analytics/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry/blob/main/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry-11.txt

Cheers,
Alex

> On 24 Jul 2024, at 13:41, Justin Iurman <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Alex,
> 
> A quick fix for draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry:
> 
> - s/encapsulation node/encapsulating node/g
> - s/decapsulation node/decapsulating node/g
> 
> Cheers,
> Justin
> 
> On 7/23/24 14:38, Alex Huang Feng wrote:
>> Dear authors,
>> Thanks a lot for writing and pushing this draft. It is very useful.
>> I only want to raise that our draft is now having a normative reference to 
>> draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization.
>> We are using the terms “encapsulation", “transit" and “decapsulation" node 
>> in 
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry/ 
>> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry/>
>>  (See section 2 Terminology)
>> I would like to get the opinion from the authors on whether the definition 
>> of these terms is stable enough to be used already on other documents.
>> The reason I am asking is because draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry 
>> is currently very close to get a WGLC and we were wondering if using the 
>> terms from oam-characterization is the way to go.
>> Regards,
>> Alex, on behalf of draft-ietf-opsawg-ipfix-on-path-telemetry authors
>> _______________________________________________
>> OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to