[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: MIB Dr. review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-07.txt
[bcc to David HArrington, he also did submit comments]
[David, I am not sure if you are on WG mailing list]
Joan, thank you very much for your reviews.
It seems to me that some WG discussion may be needed and
I would also expect new revisions of the 3 documents.
Alex and WG chairs,
I have put the comments in the I-D tracker as well.
Bert
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jcucchiara@mindspring.com [mailto:jcucchiara@mindspring.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 03:37
> To: tnadeau@cisco.com; adrian@olddog.co.uk; ccamp@ops.ietf.org
> Cc: bwijnen@lucent.com; jcucchiara@mindspring.com
> Subject: MIB Dr. review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-07.txt
>
>
>
> HI Tom and Adrian,
>
> This email has 2 parts: First are comments which
> pertain to the 3 GMPLS MIB docs under review.
> I thought this was easier than repeating these
> comments 3 times.
>
> Following are additional comments on
> draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-07.txt.
>
> thanks, Joan
>
>
>
> General comments for all 3 drafts:
> ================================================
> 1*) Suggestion only:
> When submitting these 3 GMPLS MIBs
> you may want to ask RFC-editor
> to give the GMPLS-TC-STD-MIB document the first
> RFC number, and that all 3 GMPLS MIB docs appear
> contiguously numbered.
>
> If you would like to incorporate this suggestion
> then you'd need to add a paragraph to the
> IANA Considerations section and put the usual
> RFC-editor disclaimers around your request, such
> as:
>
>
> (Note to RFC-Editor:)
> We request that you assign the first RFC number
> to the draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib, and also
> assign contiguous numbers to all three GMPLS MIB
> docs, i.e. draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib,
> draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-lsr-mib, and
> draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-te-mib.
> (Please remove this note prior to publication.)
>
>
>
> 2*) Table of Contents is incorrect, please
> regenerate it, (e.g. The SNMP Management Framework
> should be The Internet-Standard Management Framework).
>
>
> 3*) Question if these documents should have a
> contributors section. It violates the guidelines
> of "RFC Editorial Guidelines and Procedures"
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/policy.html#policy.auth2
>
> There are many people listed under
> Authors but not listed on the front page,
> so how about adding a Contributors Section?
>
> 4*) Tom's Contact info needs to be updated to
> Boxborough.
>
>
> 5*) would be clearer to be consistent about
> referring to MIB modules and always use the entire MIB name
> and site the reference:
> e.g. MPLS LSR MIB module or LSR MIB module,
> should be MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB module [RFC3813]
>
> e.g. GMPLS LSR MIB module, should be
> GMPLS-LSR-STD-MIB module [RFCXXX] (NOTE to RFC-Editor:
> please fill in XXX with the RFC name for
> draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-lsr-mib and remove this note.)
>
>
> 6*) The term "extends" is used and since this term is applied
> to GMPLS interfaces, the more appropriate phrase is
> 'sparse augments'. Please change this in the text.
>
>
>
> 7*) ORGANIZATION, please add IETF
> as in "IETF Common Control and ...."
>
>
> 8*) DESCRIPTION
> Please change the first paragraph to:
>
> Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This
> version of
> this MIB module is part of RFC XXX; see the RFC
> itself for
> full legal notices.
>
> The exception to this is the IANA-GMPLS-MIB module, which should
> include:
>
> "Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). The initial version
> of this MIB module was published in RFC XXXX. For full legal
> notices see the RFC itself. Supplementary information
> may be available on:
> http://www.ietf.org/copyrights/ianamib.html
>
>
>
>
> 9*) Please make sure to ask RFC-Editor to remove comments
> prior to publication, e.g.
>
> -- RFC Editor's Note (to be removed prior to publication):
>
> "Initial version published as part of RFC XXXX."
> -- replace XXX with actual RFC number & remove this note.
>
>
> 10*) Acknowledgements Section
> Please start off this section with:
>
> This document is a product of the CCAMP Working Group.
>
> and remove:
>
> This draft is the work of the five authors listed in the next
> section.
>
>
> 11*) Please change "Informational References"
> to "Informative References"
>
> 12*) There are a number of references (as discovered by
> Bert) that aren't in the RFC expected format.
> Please review all the references in this document and
> the other GMPLS MIB docs.
> Please see comments in the review of the
> draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-lsr-mib-08.txt for
> examples of references in the RFC format.
>
>
>
> draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-07.txt
> ======================================
>
> Section 3. GMPLS Textual Conventions MIB Definitions
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> 1) GmplsFreeformLabel TC
>
> 1a) Could the REFERENCE include section(s)?
> I suspect that this is referring to the Generalized Label
> described in section 3.2.1, is this correct?
>
> 1b) Please explain why this is 0..64 ?
> RFC3471 states that the Generalized label can be
> variable length, so wondering if this should be made
> larger?
>
> 1c) The DESCRIPTION needs a little work:
> DESCRIPTION
> "This value represents a freeform generalized MPLS Label. This
> can be used to represent label types which are not standard in
> the drafts. It may also be used by systems that do not wish to
> represent the labels using the specific label types."
>
> Please reword to something like:
>
> "This value represents a freeform GMPLS label. A freeform GMPLS
> label is specified by the system which uses it. In
> other words,
> the freeform GMPLS label is not a standard GMPLS label type,
> but is created by the system which uses it."
>
>
> 2) GmplsGeneralizedLabelTypes TC
>
>
> 2a) Could you change the name of the TC
> GmplsGeneralizedLabelTypes to
>
> GmplsLabelType
>
> It is more appropriate to have it singular when
> Imported and used in other MIBs, and dropping the
> word Generalized, because you already have the
> prefix Gmpls.
>
> 2b) Could the SYNTAX order be changed?
>
> Currently:
>
> SYNTAX INTEGER {
> gmplsMplsLabel(1),
> gmplsPortWavelengthLabel(2),
> gmplsFreeformGeneralizedLabel(3),
> gmplsSonetLabel(4),
> gmplsSdhLabel(5),
> gmplsWavebandLabel(6)
> }
>
> Proposed (NOTE also some of the names have been changed):
>
>
> SYNTAX INTEGER {
> gmplsFreeformLabelOrOther(1),
> gmplsMplsLabel(2),
> gmplsPortAndWavelengthLabel(3),
> gmplsSonetLabel(4),
> gmplsSdhLabel(5),
> gmplsWavebandLabel(6)
> }
>
>
>
> Section 4. Security Considerations
> -------------------------------------
>
> 3) Change MPLS to GMPLS in the following statement:
>
> "This module does not define any management objects. Instead, it
> defines a set of textual conventions which may be used by
> other MPLS
> MIB modules to define management objects."
>
>
> Section 5. IANA Considerations
> -------------------------------------
>
> 4) Section 5. IANA Considerations
> RFC Editor's Note (to be removed prior to publication):
> the IANA is requested to assign a value for "XXX" under
> the mib-2/mplsStdMIB subtree and to record the assignment
> in the SMI Numbers registry.
> When the assignment has been made, the RFC Editor is
> asked to replace the "XXX" (here and in the MIB module) with
> the assigned value and to remove this note.
>
>
>
> 5) Section 5. IANA Considerations
>
> Please remove the last sentence of this section:
>
> "The IANA has assigned { mplsStdMIB 1 } to the MPLS-TC-STD-MIB."
>
>
> Section 6.2 Informational References.
> ---------------------------------------
>
> 6) Section 6.2 Informational References.
> Please change to "Informative".
>
> 7) I believe the following references should be moved
> to the Normative section:
>
> [RFC3472] Ashwood-Smith, P., Berger, L. (Editors),
> "Generalized MPLS Signaling - CR-LDP Extensions",
> RFC 3472, January 2003.
>
> [RFC3473] Berger, L. (Editor), "Generalized MPLS Signaling -
> RSVP-TE Extensions", RFC 3473 January 2003.
>
> [RFC3811] Nadeau, T. and J. Cucchiara, "Definition
> of Textual
> Conventions and for Multiprotocol Label Switching
> (MPLS) Management", RFC 3811, June 2004.
>
> [RFC3945] Mannie, E. (Editor), "Generalized Multiprotocol
> Label Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945,
> October 2004.
>
> [GMPLSSonetSDH] Mannie, E., Papadimitriou, D. (Editors),
> "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
> Extensions for SONET and SDH Control",
> draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh, work in
> progress.
>
> (the above is now RFC 3946)
> [GMPLS-SONET] Mannie, E. and D. Papadimitriou,
> "Generalized Multi-
> Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Extensions for
> Synchronous Optical Network (SONET) and Synchronous
> Digital Hierarchy (SDH) Control", RFC 3946, October
> 2004.
>
>
> Also, as previously mentioned, need to check
> on the format of these References.
> Please see comments in the review of the
> draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-lsr-mib-08.txt for
> examples of references in the RFC format.
>
>
> --- the end ---
>