Sam,
Thanks for posting your review. It caused me to have a look at the
document, because I've been considering writing something of a missive
on my own. I have to say that I enjoyed reading this draft up to about
Section 3, and then I came to some problems. I'll spell those out in a
At 12:22 03-06-2009, Sam Hartman wrote:
I appreciate the work that has gone into this document. People have
worked hard to find examples, cases and even pithy
sayings/architectural principles from many areas of the IETF. The
document tries to be broad and to look at a lot of options. I think
Hi -
From: Eliot Lear l...@cisco.com
To: Sam Hartman hartmans-i...@mit.edu
Cc: ops...@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 11:15 PM
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Last Call: draft-ietf-opsawg-operations-and-management
(Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management
of New
I was assigned this document as a secdir review.
I'm not sure I have any comments in that capacity.
However, I do have significant comments on the last call of this document.
I appreciate the work that has gone into this document. People have
worked hard to find examples, cases and even pithy
While I consider much of this document thoughtful and useful, there are a
number of assertions in Section 1 which concern me.
Section 1.2 of the document states that this document does not make a
recommendation with respect to publication requirements:
Any decision to make a Management
The IESG has received a request from the Operations and Management Area
Working Group WG (opsawg) to consider the following document:
- 'Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management of New Protocols
and Protocol Extensions '
draft-ietf-opsawg-operations-and-management-07.txt as a
