Guidelines for the Use of the "OAM" Acronym in the IETF
RFC 6291

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

From: The IESG <>
To: IETF-Announce <>
Cc: RFC Editor <>
Subject: Protocol Action: '"Guidelines for the use of the OAM acronym in the IETF"' to BCP (draft-ietf-opsawg-mpls-tp-oam-def-10.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- '"Guidelines for the use of the OAM acronym in the IETF"'
  (draft-ietf-opsawg-mpls-tp-oam-def-10.txt) as a BCP

This document is the product of the Operations and Management Area
Working Group.

The IESG contact persons are Adrian Farrel and Dan Romascanu.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:

Technical Summary

   At first glance the acronym "OAM" seems to be well known and well
   understood. Looking at the acronym a bit more closely reveals a set
   of recurring problems that are revisited time and again.

   This document provides a definition of the acronym OAM (Operations,
   Administration, and Maintenance) for use in all future IETF documents
   that refer to OAM. There are other definitions and acronyms the that
   will be discussed while exploring the definition of the constituent
   parts of the OAM term.

Working group summary:

   This document was initially presented for IETF last call and IESG
   review with the main focus to define the acronym "OAM" for use
   in the MPLS-TP technology and documents. On review, the
   document was returned to the the working group to be widened
   in scope, and this document reflects that work.

   There was nothing noteworthy in the working group process

Document quality:

   The document does not identify any protocol or implementable
   system. It sets out an agreed upon taxonomy for the OAM and
   O&M terms.

   Earlier revisions of this document were reviewed in the MPLS-TP
   working group and was sent to the ITU-T for comments.


   Chris Liljenstolpe ( is the Document Shepherd
   Adrian Farrel ( is the Responsible AD.