Fair enough. Regards Brian
On 17/01/2017 08:13, BRUNGARD, DEBORAH A wrote: > Thanks Benoit- > > As Loa confirmed, we don't see this as an update. It's aligned with how we > have been doing the MPLS-TP work e.g. RFC7697 has the same wording. > > Thanks Brian for the careful review- > Deborah > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: mpls [mailto:mpls-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Benoit Claise >> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 2:35 AM >> To: Loa Andersson <l...@pi.nu>; Brian Carpenter >> <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com>; gen-art@ietf.org >> Cc: m...@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [mpls] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib-11 >> >> Loa, Brian, >>> Brian, et.al., >>> >>> We could of course update 3812 (and 3813), though this would probably >>> lead to another discussion on what updates means. >>> >>> What is refereed to is that there is now another preferred method for >>> configuration - netconf/yang. In fact this draft doe not change 3812 or >>> propose a change, so there can not be an update. The document is just >>> noting that there is a change in the environment, and that for the time >>> being it will use RFC 3812 as specified. >>> >>> Maybe Benoit have a take on this? >> No strong views on updating RFC 3812, but the text in the intro section >> and the read-only conformance statement (WriteUp mentions: The MIB >> module has a read-only conformance statement so that vendors and/or >> network operators can choose to implement/operate the MIB module as >> read-only.) do the job IMO. >> >> Regards, Benoit >>> >>> /Loa >>> >>> On 2017-01-16 06:04, Brian Carpenter wrote: >>>> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter >>>> Review result: Ready with Issues >>>> >>>> Gen-ART Last Call review of >>>> draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib-11 >>>> >>>> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area >>>> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed >>>> by the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just >>>> like any other last call comments. >>>> >>>> For more information, please see the FAQ at >>>> <http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. >>>> >>>> Document: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib-11.txt >>>> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter >>>> Review Date: 2017-01-16 >>>> IETF LC End Date: 2017-01-26 >>>> IESG Telechat date: >>>> >>>> Summary: Ready with minor issues >>>> -------- >>>> >>>> Comment: >>>> -------- >>>> >>>> I have not reviewed most details of the MIB module itself. As usual, >>>> I trust the MIB Doctors. >>>> >>>> "We know of a handful of implementations (or intent to implement)." >>>> Good. It would have been nice to see an Implementation Status section >>>> under RFC 6982. >>>> >>>> Minor issues: >>>> ------------- >>>> >>>> At the time of writing, Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) >>>> SET >>>> is no longer recommended as a way to configure MPLS networks as >>>> was >>>> described in RFC 3812 [RFC3812]. >>>> >>>> RFC3812 is explicit that it should be used for configuration: >>>> >>>> This MIB module should be used in conjunction with the >>>> companion document [RFC3813] for MPLS based traffic engineering >>>> configuration and management. >>>> >>>> RFC3812 has not been formally updated or obsoleted. Therefore, it >>>> seems >>>> to me that the present draft should formally update RFC3812 in this >>>> respect. >>>> >>>> Does the same issue apply to RFC3813, whose Abstract also states that >>>> it is used to configure an LSR? >>>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> mpls mailing list >> m...@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list Gen-art@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
