Hi Joe, Is the first paragraph necessary? The same goes for the third paragraph. The decision of where the work for GTP-U IPFIX gets done within IETF is an IETF decision. I would remove the two paragraphs.
I also agree with you that IANA IE allocation information only muddles the liaison. I would remove it. Thanks. > On Jan 8, 2025, at 7:21 PM, Joe Clarke (jclarke) > <jclarke=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: > > Thanks for the review, Med. Your changes add clarity to the text. On the > comment about the IPFIX IEs, does it even make sense to include that > paragraph? We’re specifically asking for a review of the draft and since the > IEs are frozen, it may just muddy the request. > > Our next step is to send this to dmm to see if the chairs there want to > append to the liaison and co-sign. > > Joe > > From: mohamed.boucad...@orange.com <mailto:mohamed.boucad...@orange.com> > <mohamed.boucad...@orange.com <mailto:mohamed.boucad...@orange.com>> > Date: Tuesday, January 7, 2025 at 05:57 > To: Joe Clarke (jclarke) <jcla...@cisco.com <mailto:jcla...@cisco.com>>, > opsawg@ietf.org <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org> <opsawg@ietf.org > <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>> > Subject: RE: REVIEW: Liaison statement to 3GPP for GTP-U IPFIX work > > Hi Joe, all, > > Thanks for taking care of the LS. > > You my find some edits/comments at > https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/refs/heads/master/2025/The%20IETF%20Operations%20and%20Management%20Area%20Working%20Group-rev%20Med.docx > > <https://github.com/boucadair/IETF-Drafts-Reviews/raw/refs/heads/master/2025/The%20IETF%20Operations%20and%20Management%20Area%20Working%20Group-rev%20Med.docx>, > fwiw. > > Cheers, > Med > > De : Joe Clarke (jclarke) <jclarke=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org > <mailto:jclarke=40cisco....@dmarc.ietf.org>> > Envoyé : vendredi 20 décembre 2024 10:24 > À : opsawg@ietf.org <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org> > Objet : [OPSAWG]REVIEW: Liaison statement to 3GPP for GTP-U IPFIX work > > Before sending this on to the 3GPP liaison, Benoît and I would like to get > feedback from opsawg on this LS. For now, we’re focusing this on the work > happening in opsawg (though we are aware of other dmm work). If there is > additional proposed text WG members feel strongly can be added to tie that > work together (maybe with the collaboration of dmm chairs), we would be open > to it. > > The intent of this LS is to draw broader review to this work. > > Joe > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > 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 <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org> > To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org > <mailto:opsawg-le...@ietf.org> Mahesh Jethanandani mjethanand...@gmail.com
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org
