FYI for the authors and ADs.
This can be achieved without changing the file name. Just ask the Secretariat 
to make the draft show up in the OPSAWG list.
A

-----Original Message-----
From: tom petch <ie...@btconnect.com> 
Sent: 10 April 2025 12:08
To: Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.i...@gmail.com>; rtg-...@ietf.org; l...@ietf.org
Cc: draft-opsarea-rfc5706...@ietf.org; opsawg@ietf.org
Subject: [OPSAWG]Re: [GROW] Fwd: RFC5706bis => draft-opsarea-rfc5706bis posted

From: Ketan Talaulikar <ketant.i...@gmail.com>
Sent: 10 April 2025 09:20

FYI and a request to monitor this work as it will have implications on 
upcoming/ongoing work (and documents) in the routing areas well.

Please contribute to the discussion on the opsawg mailing list.

<tp>

I would find it helpful and easier to find if the draft appeared in the OPSAWG 
list of related drafts

Tom Petch

Thanks,
Ketan


On Wed, Apr 9, 2025 at 4:19 PM Benoit Claise 
<benoit.claise=40huawei....@dmarc.ietf.org<mailto:40huawei....@dmarc.ietf.org>> 
wrote:
Dear all,

The bcc option mentioned below doesn't work, surely because I reached the 
maximum amount of recipients.
Hence this forwarded message to each individual OPS WG.

Regards, Benoit


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:        Fwd: RFC5706bis => draft-opsarea-rfc5706bis posted
Resent-Date:    Tue, 8 Apr 2025 11:11:41 -0700
Resent-From:    alias-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:alias-boun...@ietf.org>
Resent-To:      adr...@olddog.co.uk<mailto:adr...@olddog.co.uk>, 
benoit.cla...@huawei.com<mailto:benoit.cla...@huawei.com>, 
chen....@zte.com.cn<mailto:chen....@zte.com.cn>, 
cpign...@gmail.com<mailto:cpign...@gmail.com>, 
jcla...@cisco.com<mailto:jcla...@cisco.com>, 
thomas.g...@swisscom.com<mailto:thomas.g...@swisscom.com>, 
tsamir.barg...@gmail.com<mailto:tsamir.barg...@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 8 Apr 2025 20:09:23 +0200
From:   Benoit Claise 
<benoit.claise=40huawei....@dmarc.ietf.org><mailto:benoit.claise=40huawei....@dmarc.ietf.org>
To:     opsawg <opsawg@ietf.org><mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
CC:     ops-...@ietf.org<mailto:ops-...@ietf.org> 
<ops-...@ietf.org><mailto:ops-...@ietf.org>, 
draft-opsarea-rfc5706...@ietf.org<mailto:draft-opsarea-rfc5706...@ietf.org>, 
ops-ads <ops-...@ietf.org><mailto:ops-...@ietf.org>


Dear all,

Sorry for sending this email to all OPS WGs (bcc'ed), however, we need to reach 
all of you in the OPS area.
Below, you will see our AD's guidance to update the RFC 5706 "Guidelines for 
Considering Operations and Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions"

Yes, it's about time to update this RFC, published in 2009, with the ideal end 
goal to have "Manageability Considerations" section all IETF drafts. As Med 
mentioned on the OPSAWG mailing list: "We need to find the right balance 
between providing clear guidance while avoiding some rigidity. We will explore 
that path together with other areas."
Med will be sponsoring this document, as BCP, while RFC 5706 was published as 
Informational.

Today, we passed the first milestone, with the publication of:

A new version of Internet-Draft draft-opsarea-rfc5706bis-00.txt has been
successfully submitted by Benoit Claise and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:     draft-opsarea-rfc5706bis
Revision: 00
Title:    Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management of New Protocols 
and Protocol Extensions
Date:     2025-04-08
Group:    Individual Submission
Pages:    36
URL:      https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-opsarea-rfc5706bis-00.txt
Status:   https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsarea-rfc5706bis/
HTML:     https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-opsarea-rfc5706bis-00.html
HTMLized: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-opsarea-rfc5706bis


Abstract:

   New protocols or protocol extensions are best designed with due
   consideration of the functionality needed to operate and manage the
   protocols.  Retrofitting operations and management is sub-optimal.
   The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to authors and
   reviewers of documents that define new protocols or protocol
   extensions regarding aspects of operations and management that should
   be considered.

   This document obsoletes RFC 5706.

What are the diffs compared to RFC5706? At this stage, not much: "same content 
as RFC5706. The only changes are the authors list and document track", as Med 
mentioned below.
As this document is AD-sponsored, it now appears under 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ag/opsarea/documents/

What do we expect from all of you?
- please review the plan below. Feel free to comment.
- we would like to know about some specific questions/open issues/improvements 
regarding the "Manageability Considerations" for your WG
- PLEASE don't reply to all, as the discussion should happen on the OSPAWG 
mailing list. If you prefer, feel free to reply only to the contributors, in cc.

Next, we will set up a github repo, populate the open issues, and start 
resolving them.

Regards, Benoit on behalf of the contributors.

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject:        [OPSAWG]RFC5706-Refresh: Action Plan
Date:   Fri, 4 Apr 2025 06:22:36 +0000
From:   mohamed.boucad...@orange.com<mailto:mohamed.boucad...@orange.com>
To:     opsawg@ietf.org<mailto:opsawg@ietf.org> 
<opsawg@ietf.org><mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>, 
ops-...@ietf.org<mailto:ops-...@ietf.org> 
<ops-...@ietf.org><mailto:ops-...@ietf.org>
CC:     ops-...@ietf.org<mailto:ops-...@ietf.org> 
<ops-...@ietf.org><mailto:ops-...@ietf.org>


Hi all,

First of all, many thanks to all the expressions of interest and comments sent 
on the list and also in private for this work.

As indicated early this week, please find below the proposed action plan for 
the refresh of the “Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management”:


  *   I will be sponsoring the document with joint LCs in all OPS WGs with the 
expected outcome to produce a ** BCP **
  *   The reference discussion venue will be OPSDIR + OPSAWG
  *   Week of April 7th:
     *   Authors to submit draft-ietf-opsarea-rfc5706bis-00 with the same 
content as RFC5706. The only changes are the authors list and document track. 
See attached.
     *   Authors to send a call for inputs to all OPS WGs + reminder of the 
discussion venue.
     *   OPS AD to send a note to all ADs to seek for cross-area inputs.
  *   Authors to release revisions that address the initial list of change 
items and any comment from the call for inputs.
     *   More clarity on the terminology and leverage the work led by Adrian in 
NMOP
     *   IM part
     *   More guidance on the importance of DMs
     *   Soften the MIB part + IESG statement in MIBs
     *   Add more YANG
     *   Generalize the approach in RFC6123/ Manageability Considerations 
Section in all IETF Specs
  *   IETF#123 Madrid: Present status and pending issues in OPSAREA Session. A 
slot is already booked for this.
  *   Post IETF#123
     *   Authors to send reminder of call for inputs to all OPS WGs or 
follow-ups to specific points raised there in the first call.
     *   Authors to release revisions to address pending issues and any 
received comments.
  *   09/2025: OPS AD to issue a LC shared in all OPS WGs.
  *   10/2025: IETF LC

Here is the initial authors list:


  *   Benoît Claise
  *   Joe Clarke
  *   Adrian Farrel
  *   Thomas Graf
  *   Samier Barguil
  *   Carlos Pignataro
  *   Ran Chen

@authors: Please find attached a -00 of the text (md, xml, txt). I have a 
preference for the use of md + set a gitbub repo but I let you self-organize. 
You are holding the pen now :-)

Please let me know if you have any comment.

Thank you.

Cheers,
Med

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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.

_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list -- g...@ietf.org<mailto:g...@ietf.org>
To unsubscribe send an email to grow-le...@ietf.org<mailto:grow-le...@ietf.org>
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- opsawg@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to opsawg-le...@ietf.org

Reply via email to