Subject: [BEHAVE] Barry Leiba's Discuss on draft-perrault-behave-deprecate-nat-mib-v1-01: (with DISCUSS and COMMENT)

From: "Barry Leiba" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 06 Jun 2015 16:22:23 -0700

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-perrault-behave-deprecate-nat-mib-v1-01: Discuss

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-perrault-behave-deprecate-nat-mib-v1/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCUSS:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The IANA Considerations section says there are no IANA actions here.  Is
that really so?  Don't you need to change the reference for the natMIB
(123) from RFC4008 to this document?  Otherwise, what was the point of
replicating the entire MIB and changing the status field of each item to
"deprecated"?  It's clear that 4008 is no longer the current reference
for natMIB.

I would actually suggest that you also change the description field for
natMIB from "NAT-MIB" to "[deprecated]" or "NAT-MIB [deprecated]".

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

Oh, and I meant to ask: Do the Security Considerations, as written,
really apply to this document?  Would it, perhaps, be more appropriate
for these Security Considerations to say that this MIB Is entirely
deprecated, and that the security considerations in
draft-perrault-Behave-natv2-mib apply instead, to current nat MIBs?

---

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2015 19:12:28 -0400

> draft-perrault-behave-deprecate-nat-mib-v1-01: Discuss
...

Agreed.

---

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 07 Jun 2015 20:22:49 -0400

I've submitted version -02 of this document. It may take a while to show 
up because I requested a manual posting to fix Simon's address for 
notifications.

Apologies, I missed the final suggestion of your DISCUSS. The changes 
made were as follows:

- removed some unused IMPORTS to make SMILINT happy
- updated contact information in the module header
- truncated the Security Considerations section as suggested in your comment
- added IANA actions as suggested by you and IANA.

Tom Taylor

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2015 05:32:49 -0400

Perfect; thanks.  I'll clear the discuss as soon as I get to my hotel,
which involves getting through this interminable passport queue at Dublin
airport.

Barry

On Monday, June 8, 2015, Tom Taylor <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Apologies, I missed the final suggestion of your DISCUSS. The changes made
> were as follows:
>