Operationalizing Network & SErvice abstractioNs
charter-ietf-onsen-01

Yes

Mahesh Jethanandani

No Objection

Andy Newton
Charles Eckel
Christopher Inacio
Deb Cooley
Éric Vyncke
Gorry Fairhurst
Gunter Van de Velde
Jim Guichard
Ketan Talaulikar
Roman Danyliw

No Record

Mohamed Boucadair

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00-00 and is now closed.

Ballot question: "Is this charter ready for external review?"

Mahesh Jethanandani
Yes
Andy Newton
No Objection
Comment (2026-05-20 for -00-00) Sent 
I have no objection to the charter, and I am very impressed with the milestone list.

I do have a non-blocking comment regarding the first working group milestone, which is to send Liaison Statements to the various SDOs. Who executes this milestone? Do the chairs to do it? Does the rAD do it? Do the statements require WG consensus?
Charles Eckel
No Objection
Comment (2026-05-20 for -00-00) Sent 
Please add Mplify (formerly MEF) to the list of SDOs to which to send an LS.
https://www.mplify.net
Christopher Inacio
No Objection
Deb Cooley
No Objection
Comment (2026-05-20 for -00-00) Sent 
General:  spell out acronyms on first use - OSS/BSS for example.

First milestone: How will success be measured?  When the LS is sent?  When a reply is received?  Sometimes having someone who attends these organizations is more effective.
Éric Vyncke
(was Block) No Objection
Gorry Fairhurst
No Objection
Gunter Van de Velde
No Objection
Comment (2026-05-21 for -00-00) Not sent 
Support of Ketan's charter review
Jim Guichard
No Objection
Ketan Talaulikar
(was Block) No Objection
Comment (2026-05-26 for -00-02) Sent 
Thanks to everyone that contributed to get this WG formed and creating a place where operators can drive the work in the abstraction layers.

Thanks for taking care of clarifying how the existing WG documents in progress in RTG area WGs will be handled.
Roman Danyliw
No Objection
Comment (2026-05-20 for -00-00) Sent 
Two editorial items:

(1) Consider expanding "BSS"

(2) Compliments to the authors of this charter for making a very clear milestone chart.  The mapping between the work-items back to the charter text and the status was extremely useful.  It is with regret that I recommend that before this is charter is approved (assuming community consensus) that they get moved into the official datatracker milestone scheme.  The reasoning is that if any changes need to be made to the milestones this would require directly editing the charter text which triggers a re-charter.
Mohamed Boucadair
No Record
Comment (2026-05-20 for -00-00) Not sent 
I prefer to recuse although I'm not involved in any of the proposed updates that build on work I co-authored.