Subject: [TICTOC] Ben Campbell's No Objection on draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-mib-08: (with COMMENT)

From: "Ben Campbell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2016 13:41:34 -0700

Ben Campbell has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-mib-08: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-mib/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Is the lack of 2119 usage intentional? There is some text, especially in
the security considerations, that reads as if  2119 keywords were
intended, even though there is no 2119 reference and most of these are in
lower case (although there is an instance of "NOT recommended" in the
last paragraph of section 5.)

I'm surprised at the single normative reference, especially that there
are no normative references related to SNMP or SMI.