Subject: [Anima] Deborah Brungard's No Objection on charter-ietf-anima-01-05: (with COMMENT)

From: Deborah Brungard via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 13:17:12 -0700

Deborah Brungard has entered the following ballot position for
charter-ietf-anima-01-05: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-anima/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The sentence in the first paragraph:
"for automated network management and control of
networks that are developed, built and operated by professionals."

I found the wording "operated by professionals" confusing.
Especially this is the first sentence of the charter.

It seems to be a cut and paste reversal from the reference model
document where it says:
"loosely referred to as "professionally managed" networks".

The reference model differentiates between managed networks and
unmanaged networks. It further differentiates for managed
networks between traditional (non-autonomic) networks and
autonomic networks. The interpretation is the network does
need to managed (by professionals), and then one can introduce
autonomic management, due to the additional security and trust
issues the autonomic model does not cover.

Suggest to use the wording of the reference model document to
give context or (I prefer) reuse the wording in the original charter
for the first two paragraphs as the original was very clear in scope
of use.