RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-tewg-measure-06.txt

Waisum, we will have time on the agenda for this.
I've been meaning to printout an old version-05 to compare
so I hope to have it read by me soon.

I encourage everyone else to read this and provide feedback as well.

thanks,

Jim

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003, Lai, Wai S (Waisum), ALABS wrote:

> Bert,
>   We would like to have some feedback from you regarding the TEM draft,
> especially if the revised (06) version has met your expectations and
> objectives in the AD review that you sent out previously.
>
> Jim, Ed,
>   We'd like to have some time on the TEWG agenda to discuss the updated
> I-D.
>
> Thanks, Wai Sum
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS
> Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 9:47 AM
> To: Lai, Wai S (Waisum), ALABS; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); [email protected]
> Cc: Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS
> Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-tewg-measure-06.txt
>
>
> > From: Lai, Wai S (Waisum), ALABS
> > Sent: Monday, July 28, 2003 7:56 AM
> > To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); [email protected]
> > Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-tewg-measure-06.txt
> >
> > Bert and all,
> >
> > Many thanks for the AD review and the subsequent comments.
> > We have now completed our revision of the TE Measurement draft
> > based on your inputs.  The main body of document has been much
> > shortened and streamlined - with requirements clearly identified.
> > Supporting materials have been moved to Appendices.
> > Please review.
> >
> > Thanks, Wai Sum
>
> I think the 06-draft http://ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tewg-measure-06.txt well addresses Bert's comments:
>
> 'I would expect a CRISP set of "requirements for additional measurements, configurable/negotiable parameters/controls" ... but not the extensive exploration and text that I now see'.
>
> The requirements are now clearly identified for additional measurements, configurable/negotiable parameters/controls, etc., and the main text has been greatly shortened.
>
> It would be good to hear from Bert on this.  Can we now move forward and finalize?
>
> Thanks,
> Jerry
>