Ed,
Benoit,
Thank you for the comments.
I'm not sure I understand the need to change the ifCapStackMIB
MODULE-IDENTITY value.
It has been allocated by IANA as { mib-2 166 } in RFC 5066.
Since we did not change the name (or the content) it should stay with
the same OID,
If nothing is changed in the MIB module, then you're right.
And the REVISION clause should be kept.
Regards, Benoit
similar say to MAU-MIB -- the last version is defined in RFC 4836,
where mauMod MODULE-IDENTITY is { mib-2 26 6 }, exactly the same as
mauMod MODULE-IDENTITY in the RFCs it obsoleted, such as RFC 3636, RFC
2668 and RFC 2239.
Regards,
-E.
*From:*Benoit Claise [mailto:bcla...@cisco.com]
*Sent:* Wednesday, January 02, 2013 16:14
*To:* Edward Beili
*Cc:* opsawg@ietf.org
*Subject:* draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5066bis-00.txt review
Ed,
Here is my draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5066bis-00.txt review
1.
OLD
-- EdNote: Replace XXXX with the actual RFC number &
-- remove this note
::= { mib-2 166 }
NEW
-- EdNote: Replace XXXX with the actual RFC number &
-- remove this note
::= { mib-2 XXXX }
_
_Consequently, the IANA considerations section need to be changed/
7. IANA Considerations
Object identifier 166 for the ifCapStackMIB MODULE-IDENTITY have been
allocated by IANA in the MIB-2 sub-tree.
2.
I don't believe that you need the following REVISION
REVISION "200711070000Z" -- November 07, 2007
DESCRIPTION "Initial version, published as RFC 5066."
_
Editorial_
1.
OLD
Abstract
This document defines Management Information Base (MIB) module for
use with network management protocols in TCP/IP-based internets.
NEW
Abstract
This document defines a Management Information Base (MIB) module for
use with network management protocols in TCP/IP-based internets.
2.
OLD
In addition the Security Considerations section was updated to
NEW
In addition, the Security Considerations section was updated to
Regards, Benoit (as a contributor)
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
OPSAWG@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
