Benoit,

Your email prompted me to take another look at -08, and I found a typo.

In the final paragraph of section 3,1, in the text "An example of
"Path-Congruent OAM" is the Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification
(VCCV), described is [RFC5085]", "described is" should be "described in".

Cheers,
Andy

On Thu, Jul 3, 2025 at 5:34 AM Benoit Claise <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Taking this email as an anchor for the longer discussion on the list...
> Given that no objections were raised since almost one month, we conclude
> that the proposal made by the authors in
> draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-08 resolves this issue. Also, thanks
> Andy and Matthew for the help to clarify the intent of RFC 5085
>
> Regards, Joe and Benoit
>
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to