Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-08.txt> (An Overview of the OAM Tool Set for MPLS based Transport Networks) to Informational RFC

From: Huub van Helvoort <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 23:48:59 +0100

IESG,

I do *NOT* support this draft unless the following changes are made:

The first paragraph of section 8 Acknowledgements has to be removed:
It is an attempt to capture history, but lacks accuracy.
Removal does not impact the technical information in the draft;
the tools have evolved significantly from the strawman tools proposed
in Stockholm; some members of the MEAD team (I am one of them) do not
consider that an agreement on this proposal was reached.

I also request the removal of my name from this acknowledgements section
since I do not support this tool set, neither as an individual nor as
ITU-T Q10 rapporteur. The latter is implied by mentioning my name in
the same sentence as a WG chair and ADs.

Regards, Huub.

=============
> The IESG has received a request from the Multiprotocol Label Switching WG
> (mpls) to consider the following document:
> - 'An Overview of the OAM Tool Set for MPLS based Transport Networks'
>    <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-08.txt>  as an Informational RFC
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
> [email-masked] mailing lists by 2012-03-23. Exceptionally, comments may be
> sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please retain the
> beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.
>
> Abstract
>
>     This document provides an overview of the OAM toolset for MPLS based
>     Transport Networks.  The toolset consists of a comprehensive set of
>     fault management and performance monitoring capabilities (operating
>     in the data-plane) which are appropriate for transport networks as
>     required in RFC 5860 and support the network and services at
>     different nested levels.  This overview includes a brief recap of
>     MPLS-TP OAM requirements and functions, and of generic mechanisms
>     created in the MPLS data plane to allow the OAM packets run in-band
>     and share their fate with data packets.  The protocol definitions for
>     each of the MPLS-TP OAM tools are defined in separate documents (RFCs
>     or Working Group drafts) which are referenced by this document.
>
>
> The file can be obtained via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis/
>
> IESG discussion can be tracked via
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis/ballot/
>
>
> No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.
> _______________________________________________
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce

---

From: "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 11:51:54 +0100

Huub hi,

Thanks for your comments to IESG...

We can easily remove your name from the acknowledgement section. We put
you there upon your request! 

I am sorry that I am going to share on the list a private mail from you
to me but I can see no other choice with the mail you have just sent to
the list. 

As you recall you were an editor of the draft and on June 2010 (when the
document was already an IETF document for a while), you have asked to
remove your name from the list of editors. See 
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mpls-tp/current/msg04118.html. the
main reason was as you said: 

"It was my intention to be editor as an IETF member, however there are
people that interpret my name/role differently. They see it as being
editor as an ITU-T member and recently even as being editor as an ITU-T
Q10 rapporteur.".

In a private mail you sent me later (attached) you proposed to include
you in the acknowledgement section:

" Yes, remove my name as editor. As Adrian suggested, you could mention
me in the acknowledgements section."

It is a pity that you did not inform us that you changed your mind since
then, but it can easily be fixed!

Best regards,

Nurit

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
ext Huub van Helvoort
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 12:49 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-08.txt> (An
Overviewof the OAM Tool Set for MPLS based Transport Networks)
toInformational RFC

IESG,

Regards, Huub.

=============

> [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>  mailing lists by 2012-03-23.
Exceptionally, comments may be

> sent to [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>  instead. In either case,
please retain the

> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis/
<http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis/> 

http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis/ballot/
<http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis/ballot/

> [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]> 

> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce> 

Subject: Re: MPLS-T OAM Analysis
From: "ext Huub van Helvoort" <[email-masked]>
To: "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 09:38:25 +0100

Hello Nurit,

You wrote:

> We plan shortly to submit a new revision of
> draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis.

Because I am not aware of this submission I assume
I am already not part of the "we" anymore.

> Can you please confirm to me whether you wish to have your
 > name removed from the document.

Yes, remove my name as editor.
As Adrian suggested, you could mention me in the
acknowledgements section.

Regards, Huub.

-- 
================================================================
Always remember that you are unique...just like everyone else...

---

From: Rui Costa <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 14:44:47 +0000

Hello,	

i) I support this proposal.	

Apart from the text section mentioned below, the different versions of the draft (at least the initial ones) have presented, from the available options and IMHO, Y.1731 as the readiest/closest most to requirements. On the other hand, this section looks to want being a memorandum about decisions regarding OAM, which didn't follow that option. So, it's important not to put ITU-T or MEAD in subject for that.	

ii) " [RFC 6375]	
      augments that set of identifiers to include identifier information	
      in a format used by the ITU-T"	
Is the intended reference [MPLS TP ITU Idents], draft-ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers? 6375's related to packet loss and delay measurements, not to identifiers.	

Regards,	
Rui	

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Huub van Helvoort
Sent: quarta-feira, 21 de Março de 2012 22:49
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-08.txt> (An Overview of the OAM Tool Set for MPLS based Transport Networks) to Informational RFC

IESG,

The first paragraph of section 8 Acknowledgements has to be removed:
It is an attempt to capture history, but lacks accuracy.
Removal does not impact the technical information in the draft; the tools have evolved significantly from the strawman tools proposed in Stockholm; some members of the MEAD team (I am one of them) do not consider that an agreement on this proposal was reached.

I also request the removal of my name from this acknowledgements section since I do not support this tool set, neither as an individual nor as ITU-T Q10 rapporteur. The latter is implied by mentioning my name in the same sentence as a WG chair and ADs.

Regards, Huub.

=============
> [email-masked] mailing lists by 2012-03-23. Exceptionally, comments may 
> be sent to [email-masked] instead. In either case, please retain the

---

From: Huub van Helvoort <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 00:27:33 +0100

Hallo Nurit,

> Thanks for your comments to IESG...

The IESG did send the message in order to make a decision, that
is why I addressed my comments to them.

> We can easily remove your name from the acknowledgement section.

Go ahead and do it.

> We put you there upon your request!

It is clear from your response that you did not understand my initial
explanation and request to be removed as editor.
When I wrote "you could mention me in the acknowledgements section" I
did *not* mean "make it more easy for the reader to mis-interpret the
acknowledgement for my role as Q10 rapporteur".
You did not even send me the text that you were going to include to
verify that this text would have taken away my concern.

> to me but I can see no other choice with the mail you have just sent to

It just proves that you did not understand my initial explanation.

Regards, Huub.
==============
>  > _____________________________________________

---

From: "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 08:11:11 +0100

Huub hi,
The document went through two WG last calls...it is a pity you did not
use the opportunity to provide your useful comment then. 
I am surprised that it took you almost two years and seven revisions of
the document before you actually realized you are not happy with the way
we acknowledged you upon your own request. Surely for a draft where the
removal of your name from the list of editors was driven by your
concerns that people might misread your involvement/position. I would
think that in two years you would get around to checking for you that
the new acknowledgement is satisfactory. 
Best regards,
Nurit

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
ext Huub van Helvoort
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 1:28 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-08.txt> (An
Overviewofthe OAM Tool Set for MPLS based Transport Networks)
toInformational RFC

Hallo Nurit,

Go ahead and do it.

Regards, Huub.
==============

---

From: Huub van Helvoort <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2012 22:11:59 +0100

Hallo Nurit,

I will *not* change my mind.
So it is useless to continue this thread.

Just make the changes I requested.

Regards, Huub.
==============

On 23-03-12 08:11, Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon) wrote:
> Subject: Re: Last Call:<draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-08.txt>  (An
>> Subject: Re: Last Call:<draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-08.txt>  (An
>>   >  [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>  mailing lists by 2012-03-23.
>>   >  sent to [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>  instead. In either
> case,
>> please retain the
>>
>>   >  [email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>

-- 
*****************************************************************
                          我爱外点一七三一

---

From: "Sprecher, Nurit (NSN - IL/Hod HaSharon)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2012 08:50:48 +0200

No one has asked you to change your mind!

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of ext Huub van Helvoort
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2012 11:12 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-08.txt> (AnOverviewoftheOAM Tool Set for MPLS based Transport Networks) toInformational RFC

Hallo Nurit,

Regards, Huub.
==============