Re: [OPSAWG] AD review of draft-ietf-opsawg-9092-update-08

2024-01-18 Thread Randy Bush
hi rob, thanks for review. appreciated. > (1) p 4, sec 3. inetnum: Class > >Any particular inetnum: object SHOULD have, at most, one geofeed >reference, whether a remarks: or a proper geofeed: attribute when it >is implemented. If there is more than one, the geofeed: attribute >

Re: [OPSAWG] A new draft on Network Incident Terminology

2024-01-18 Thread Michael Richardson
I thought, upon first reading of your write up, that this was about a Network *Security* Incident, but upon reading the document, it's clear that it refers to more mundane things, like a link failure. I'm not sure if security incidents are particularly different than non-security incidents; but

[OPSAWG] A new draft on Network Incident Terminology

2024-01-18 Thread Adrian Farrel
All, At the side meeting in Prague, Nigel and I committed to putting together a first stab at a terminology set for network incidents. We have now posted a -00 draft. The intentions here are: * To provide a starting point for discussions of the terminology * To give something

Re: [OPSAWG]  WG Adoption Call for draft-opsawg-evans-discardmodel-02

2024-01-18 Thread Marcos Sanz
Dear all, I also support adopting this document and appreciate its value for IXs. (Full disclosure: I contributed to the document in earlier versions before it was presented here). Best regards, Marcos Sanz > -Mensaje original- > De: Henk Birkholz > Enviado el: miércoles, 17 de enero