Hi Tal,
Yes all is addressed on my side.
Thanks and regards, Benoit
Hi Benoit,
We believe that the current version addresses these issues:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization/12/
Please see inline, marked [TM].
On Wed, Sep 10, 2025 at 7:48 PM [email protected]
<[email protected]> wrote:
Dear all,
Great series of comments by Tim.
I don't want to reply for Tim here, but I believe that draft v11 is now clearly.
Three minor observations on my side
- An example of "Hybrid OAM" that is also "In-Data-Packet OAM", is
an IOAM [RFC9197] trace option that is incorporated into data
packets. According to [RFC9197], IOAM '...records OAM information
within the packet while the packet traverses a particular network
domain. The term "in situ" refers to the fact that the OAM data
is added to the data packets rather than being sent within packets
specifically dedicated to OAM.'
I would extend the first IOAM acronym, to stress the "in situ" qualifier, otherwise the
reference to "in situ" comes out of nowhere, unless you know RFC9197.
Since this document is about terminology, this seems important.
[TM] Fixed.
Should this draft also mention something such as : the "In situ" qualifier
should not be reused, if possible, and is not advised by this document? Or this is going
to far?
Note: I saw this note, in the appendix. Is this sufficient?
In-Data-Packet OAM was in some cases referred to as "in-band".
Initially, "In situ OAM" [RFC9197] was also referred to as "In-band
OAM", but was renamed due to the overloaded meaning of "In-band OAM".
Further, [RFC9232] also intertwines the terms "in-band" with "in
situ", though [I-D.song-opsawg-ifit-framework] settled on using "in
Situ". Other similar uses, including [P4-INT-2.1] and
[I-D.kumar-ippm-ifa], still use variations of "in-band", "in band",
or "inband".
[TM] Yes, it seems that the text in the appendix is sufficient in this context.
-
Appendix A. Examples of the Use of the Term In-Band
This appendix provides a few examples of the use of the term "in-
band". These are intended to highlight the varying interpretations
of the term across different contexts.
Do you want to say: These are intended to highlight the varying interpretations
of the term across different contexts, which led to the guidelines in this
document.
[TM] Fixed
- nits
measurment
[TM] Fixed.
Regards, Benoit (Doc. Shepherd)
Thanks,
The authors.
Hi Tim,
Thanks for the comments, and thanks for some further offline discussion.
We believe the current version of the draft addresses these comments:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization/11/
Please let us know if there are any remaining comments about this version
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
