From: mohamed.boucad...@orange.com <mohamed.boucad...@orange.com> Sent: 24 October 2024 13:30
Re-, Maybe what would be useful is that Tom shares an example or two of when he “understand the words but cannot discern the meaning”. <tp> e.g. Active-Passive OAM. Active-Hybrid OAM. Hybrid-Passive OAM. Active-Hybrid-Passive OAM. I see no definition of these categories nor any suggestion as to what I should do with these phrases. Should authors start classifying their OAM based on their understanding of these words without further explanation? Or what? or, choosing one of many, Path: OAM in relation to a path Packet: OAM in relation to a user data packet. What are you trying to convey here? I have an understanding of what a packet is and what a path is but what this might be saying about a path or a packet defeats me. HTH Tom Petch Cheers, Med De : Adrian Farrel <adr...@olddog.co.uk> Envoyé : jeudi 24 octobre 2024 13:41 À : tom petch <ie...@btconnect.com>; Joe Clarke (jclarke) <jclarke=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org>; opsawg@ietf.org Objet : [OPSAWG]Re: WG LAST CALL: Guidelines for Charactering "OAM" Thanks Tom. Carlos and I will surely take another pass at clarifying the guidance, and will also try to throw more light on the meaning. It is, of course, ridiculous to ask you to suggest text because how could you when you can't discern the meaning? But it is also a challenge for us when we thought what he wrote was clear. But we can try. Cheers, Adrian On 24/10/2024 11:53 BST tom petch <ie...@btconnect.com<mailto:ie...@btconnect.com>> wrote: From: Joe Clarke (jclarke) <jclarke=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:jclarke=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org>> Sent: 21 October 2024 17:21 This starts a two week WG LC https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization/. The authors have been polled and there is no known IPR on this work that has been disclosed at this time. Please post comments and thoughts on this document’s readiness to the list. We ultimately want to run publication of this in conjunction with the on-path telemetry document. Thanks to Greg Mirsky who agreed to shepherd this draft. <tp> Not Ready - I think I understand the words but cannot discern the meaning There seem to be somewhere between four and fifteen terms being defined in various ways with no clear - to me - guidance as to when or when not they should be used It comes across to me as a document written by experts for experts which non-experts, like me, will struggle to use consistently which I suspect will confuse authors more than at present as to what term to use when Tom Petch Tom Petch The WG LC will run until November 4. Thanks. Joe _______________________________________________ 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> ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration, Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci. This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law; they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments. As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified. Thank you. _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
