Early Review of draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5706bis-01
review-ietf-opsawg-rfc5706bis-01-perfmetrdir-early-mirsky-2026-01-26-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5706bis
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 09)
Type Early Review
Team Performance Metrics Directorate (perfmetrdir)
Deadline 2026-01-23
Requested 2026-01-07
Requested by Alvaro Retana
Authors Benoît Claise , Joe Clarke , Adrian Farrel , Samier Barguil , Carlos Pignataro , Ran Chen
I-D last updated 2026-10-08 (Latest revision 2026-10-06)
Completed reviews Iotdir Early review of -01 by Dave Thaler (diff)
Dnsdir Early review of -01 by Johan Stenstam (diff)
Yangdoctors Early review of -01 by Martin Björklund (diff)
Artart Early review of -01 by Harald T. Alvestrand (diff)
Genart Early review of -01 by Joel M. Halpern (diff)
Tsvart Early review of -01 by Lars Eggert (diff)
Secdir Early review of -03 by Jacqueline McCall (diff)
Perfmetrdir Early review of -01 by Greg Mirsky (diff)
Rtgdir Early review of -01 by Dhruv Dhody (diff)
Opsdir Early review of -01 by Tina Tsou (Ting ZOU) (diff)
Intdir Early review of -04 by Timothy Winters (diff)
Tsvart IETF Last Call review of -09 by Lars Eggert
Artart IETF Last Call review of -09 by Harald T. Alvestrand
Comments 
Hi!

I'm requesting an early review of this document from all directorates, given the requirement that all future RFCs include an Operational Considerations section (see Section 3 for details). Focus on how the contents of the draft (including the concise checklist of key questions in Appendix A) apply to your specific area of expertise.

Thanks!
Assignment Reviewer Greg Mirsky
State Completed
Request Early review on draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5706bis by Performance Metrics Directorate Assigned
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pm-dir/0rNN5D-Sqyz8hxr9fGKkPk9PWxQ
Reviewed revision 01 (document currently at 09)
Result Has issues
Completed 2026-01-26
review-ietf-opsawg-rfc5706bis-01-perfmetrdir-early-mirsky-2026-01-26-00
Dear Authors,
Thank you for your work on this document. I wholeheartedly agree with your view
that adding Operational Considerations to an IETF document will help in the
deployment of the specified mechanism. I found the document well-written and
easy to read. The concern I have is with the assertion of the relationship
between the scopes of Operation and Management, Operation, Administration, and
Maintenance, expressed in the Terminology section as:
      The broader concept of "operations and management" that is the
      subject of this document encompasses OAM, in addition to other
      management and provisioning tools and concepts.
Can you reference a document that discusses that relationship? It seems that
RFC 6291 avoided discussing this issue. In your opinion, what is the value of
that assertion to the document?

Regards,
Greg