Subject: [ipcdn] draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-01.txt

From: RJ Atkinson <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2002 19:02:16 -0500

Rich,

	I have some possibly dumb questions about your draft and a more general
question about the stuff here as it relates to stuff in the CableLabs'
DOCSIS process.  With luck, I'm just confused and you can clarify things
for me. :-)

1) Revision date
	The current online version has text indicated "Expires: August 2001"
but has a Fall date stamp at ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/.  So I think
maybe that draft really dates to Fall 2001.  Correct ?  Could you please
update/fix the dates the next time you revise the draft (presumably
before IETF/MSP) ??  Also, if the date inside the MODULE-IDENTITY clause
could get updated that would be very helpful.

2) Relationship to DOCSIS specs/draft specs
	I'm assuming that your draft is in reasonably close sync with work
coordinated at CableLabs on newer DOCSIS revisions than the REFERENCES
section of the draft seems to list.  True ?  Which DOCSIS revisions are
represented in your draft (e.g. 1.0, 1.1, 2.0, other) ??   Or maybe it
would be simpler to ask whether the draft and the corresponding DOCSIS
documents/drafts will be reasonably in sync as of IETF/MSP ?

	It would be helpful if your draft explicitly cited whichever newer
DOCSIS drafts/specs/documents relate to it in the REFERENCES section,
if there are any newer DOCSIS specs relating to the draft.

3) Security Considerations
	It would be helpful across the board (i.e. not just in your draft)
if folks would explicitly note that SNMPv2c is just as insecure as SNMPv1
is.  Folks generally do document this for SNMPv1.  SNMP wizards know it is
true for SNMPv2c, but there is a lot of confusion in the world about what
SNMPv2c does/doesn't provide.  Additional clarity would be very helpful
and ought not require very many more words.

More generally, not specific to this draft, some folks appear to think that
DOCSIS specs and IETF IPCDN drafts aren't fully in sync on OID definitions
and such like (for the OID branches that are within scope for IPCDN WG).
I hope that is either confusion on those folks part or just a temporary
lack of sync (e.g. because neither DOCSIS documents nor I-Ds/RFCs can be
instantly updated) and that the end result will be full synchronisation
of the DOCSIS documents' citation/definition of those OIDs and the set
of documents in this WG.  To me, it seems sensible to use the CableLabs
fora as a kind of Design Team for any IPCDN MIBs relating to DOCSIS.
If you could clarify reality in this respect, I'd be very greatly obliged.

Thanks,

Ran
[email-masked]

_______________________________________________
IPCDN mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn