Subject: [sfc] Alia Atlas' Discuss on draft-ietf-sfc-problem-statement-10: (with DISCUSS)

From: "Alia Atlas" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 06:40:22 -0800

Alia Atlas has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-sfc-problem-statement-10: Discuss

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.)

Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sfc-problem-statement/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It was pointed out to me that the definitions in the problem-statement
and the architecture differ.  These seem to be minor and accidental
differences.  It is better to have the definitions in only one place or
at least have a single authoritative reference.  Could you decide upon
the correct and final definitions and please do one of the following:
    a) For overlapping definitions, define them only in the
problem-statement and have the architecture refer to the
problem-statement for the authoritative definitions (quoting if
desirable).
    b) For overlapping definitions, define them only in the architecture
and have the problem-statemen refer to the architecture for the
authoritative definitions (quoting if desirable)