Subject: [Lime] Adrian Farrel's No Objection on charter-ietf-lime-00-11: (with COMMENT)

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:54:49 -0700

Adrian Farrel has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-lime-00-11: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-lime/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

A clause crept in between -10 and -11. While I don't want to block on it,
I do want to raise it because it is a subject that got a lot of
discussion on the LIME mailing list going right back to when it was the
TIME mailing list. it is one of the topics that was in the original
proposal, but was scoped out to get focus in the work...

   including management mechanisms to facilitate
   mapping between OAM mechanisms at different layers

This concept was spoken against in strong terms in the RTGWG meeting in
Toronto suggesting it is even a dangerous idea.

I would suggest, therefore, that if it is to be added to the charter, it
should be described in more detail.

---

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 15:29:42 +0200

Dear All,

Adrian and I had a chat.
I want to make sure that the WG designs those models to facilitate the 
drilling down into different layers. And we don't want to specify an new 
inter-layer OAM mechanism.
So I understand Adrian's reaction below.

"facilitate better mapping between information reported from OAM 
mechanisms that operate in different network layers" better reflects 
what both of us had in mind, and is now in the charter v12.

https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fcharter-ietf-lime%2Fwithmilestones-00-11.txt&difftype=--html&submit=Go!&url2=https%3A%2F%2Fdatatracker.ietf.org%2Fdoc%2Fcharter-ietf-lime%2Fwithmilestones-00-12.txt

Regards, Benoit

> _______________________________________________
> Lime mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lime
> .
>

---

From: "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 13:57:17 +0000

Looks good, Benoit! Thanks Benoit and Adrian!

Carlos.

On Oct 16, 2014, at 3:29 PM, Benoit Claise <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Dear All,
> 
> Adrian and I had a chat.
> I want to make sure that the WG designs those models to facilitate the drilling down into different layers. And we don't want to specify an new inter-layer OAM mechanism.
> "facilitate better mapping between information reported from OAM mechanisms that operate in different network layers" better reflects what both of us had in mind, and is now in the charter v12.
>