Sorry for the delay; these will be published shortly.

Final version of NSF - for publication

Here is a public comment received via email:

From: Augusto Ciuffoletti <augusto@di.unipi.it>
To: Greg Newby <newby@arsc.edu>
Cc: All WG <wg-all@ogf.org>
Subject: Re: [wg-all] New documents in public comment
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2010 10:56:16 +0200

Dear Greg and all,

I browsed the informational document "Network Services Framework" and
appreciated it. I noticed that many of the issues covered in your document
are complementary with the content of a paper of mine that should appear on
the October issue of ACM Sigcomm CCR. You can find a preliminary version of
the paper at http://eprints.adm.unipi.it/740/: hope you find it of interest.

On my side, I plan to give a more detailed view to your document, and inform
you if something interesting comes to my mind.

Thank you,

Augusto

Following comments provided by Jeroen van der Ham:

I have reviewed the Network Services Framework document, and I believe it is a fine document, that reflects what the group has decided on, and 
provides a good framework for the coming work and documents.

I can't speak for the whole NML-WG, but my personal opinion is that the document is completely compatible with the goals and use of NML.

I do have some small remarks, mostly editorial:

The word "community" in the first sentence is italicized, and it shouldn't be.

Section 2.3 mentions a "NSI interface", which expands to a Network Service Interface interface, is that correct?

Just above Figure 6 is the line "Need more explanation of figure 6...", I assume that's fixed?

Figure 7 looks corrupted on the Mac version.

At the end of section 3.3 is a sentence with "serve as *a* both human readable".

In section 3.4 is a sentence ending in "[…], require temporal aspects to be understood and deterministic." I think I understand what it means, but it
 is a strange way to say it.

Section 3.5 mentions four types of trust, but then only three are enumerated.

Section 4.1 uses "intra-network" and "Inter-Network" (and once "intra-Network"). Why the different capitalization, what does that mean?

Figure 9 should also include the meaning of the abbreviation SDP, and it should be mentioned in the text explaining figure 9 as well.

At the end of section 4.2.1 is an enumeration of STP instances, according to the way they are enumerated, there are only 45 of them, not 90.

Section 4.2.2 is titled Service Demarcation Point (fix capitalization there too?), but the section mentions SDPs only once. The section should at 
least include the abbreviation, and perhaps some more wording about what it is and what it's for.
Figure 10 and accompanying text makes it unclear how grouping relates to SDPs, is a group an SDP, or is each pairing of STPs an SDP? Shouldn't it be 
called an SDP group?