-----Original Message-----
From: owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org
[mailto:owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of C. M. Heard
o draft-ietf-isis-wg-mib-24.txt
Management Information Base for IS-IS (Proposed
Standard) - 20 of 22
Token: Alex Zinin
I did the MIB Doctor review for this doc and I am satisfied
with it. I see come comments from a GenArt in the tracker.
I agree with those on Section 2 and disagree with those on
Section 7. The reason I disagree is that complying with the
comment would require listing all writeable objects in the
MIB module, and it should be sufficient to say "all writeable
attributes have the potential to disrupt network operations
if improperly modified" as the doc now does.
I am a little surprised by this comment from Mike, and I think that I
would disagree.
We are telling explicitly MIB writers at
http://www.ops.ietf.org/mib-security.html:
-- if you have any read-write and/or read-create objects, please
-- describe their specific sensitivity or vulnerability.
-- RFC 2669 has a very good example.
I am opposed to replace this by another blanket generic text. Different
objects bear different threats in disrupting network operations if
improperly modified, and I believe that it is important for the MIB
documents to specifically and explicitly list those.