Summary: Has enough positions to pass.
Just to follow up, Deborah explained the answer to my question in private e-mail - so, no action needed from anyone else. Previous ballot comment: I had a similar question to Mirja's - I wondered what the relationship between this draft and draft-ietf-teas-actn-framework might be. I'm not saying there should be a relationship, only that I wondered, and if there is a relationship, readers might benefit from understanding it.
Thank you for a well written and understandable document. Please also see Tianran Zhou's OpDir review at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/review-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework-05-opsdir-lc-zhou-2018-04-20/ I have some nits to help improve readability further -- the HTML / rich version is here: https://mozphab-ietf.devsvcdev.mozaws.net/D3500 draft-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework.txt:125 "multiple gigabits in traditional frequency bands and beyond 10 gigabits in higher frequency bands with more band width." band width vs bandwidth draft-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework.txt:153 " there are advantages if radio link interfaces can be modeled and be managed using the same structure and the same approach, " Readability: I'd suggest "can be modeled and managed using..." draft-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework.txt:314 " solution is network management system(NMS), while an emerging one is SDN. " is *a* network management system (NMS) draft-ietf-ccamp-microwave-framework.txt:342 " If nodes from different vendors shall be managed by the same SDN controller via a node management interface (north bound interface," I think that this would be better as: "If nodes from different vendors will be managed by the same" or "If nodes from different vendors are to be managed by the same"
This document is well-written and it is absolutly clear that the authors did a very good job in identifying requirements and gaps, as such I think writing this document has for sure been useful for the progress of this work in the IETF! However, I think most of the information in this doc (if needed to be achieved at all) could have been added to an appendix of the actually Microwave Radio Link YANG Data Model that is to come, rather then publishing it as a stand-alone document.