--On 10. april 2003 14:03 -0400 IESG Secretary <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
wrote:
Yes No-Objection Discuss * Abstain
Harald Alvestrand [ ] [ X ] [ ] [ ]
note: this does not mean that I like it.....
In particular, I don't like the fact that the document can't decide whether
it's an architecture, an introduction or a specification. It goes into lots
of details that are ALMOST specified, but then just says that these are
"finished elsewhere" - sometimes giving, sometimes not giving, the forward
pointers.
It's just about right (although overly detailed, and lacking some pointers
to where the "real spec" is) for an introduction.
It also *contains* an architecture description - the idea of a control
plane that is a fully connected IP network (with, apparently, manual link
configuration), a set of links that are not necessarily the control links,
and in many cases not even IP-capable links, and groupings of these that
can be manipulated and controlled in various ways, and a set of protocols
and ways to use those protocols that are defined in other documents.
But the lenght and the level of detail means that it's very hard for me to
be sure I have grasped that architecture correctly and fully.
And - note - I have said nothing about whether or not I *like* that
architecture.
Note: It will be a while before this is published as an RFC. There are no
less than thirteen "works in progress" in its normative references.