Subject: [ipcdn] part 1 of comments on draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-signaling-05.txt

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 15:08:29 -0700

Hi -

Here's the first installment of my MIB review comments on
draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-signaling-05.txt.  This is the "easy"
stuff from 1id-guidlines and ID-Checklist.

Checks based on
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt:

- document is in ASCII: OK
- no control characters other than EOL/FF: OK

1) lines limited to 72 characters:
trailing blanks make line 26 too long (73 characters)
trailing blanks make line 99 too long (73 characters)
trailing blanks make line 2206 too long (73 characters)
trailing blanks make line 2226 too long (73 characters)
trailing blanks make line 2240 too long (73 characters)
trailing blanks make line 2301 too long (73 characters)

2) some pages have more than 58 lines

3) pages not separated by FF character

- no overstriking: OK

2) some pages have more than 58 lines

3) pages no separated by FF character

- no overstriking: OK

4) the words "INTERNET-DRAFT" should be in upper left
corner of first page

5) IPR Boilerplate: OK, but note that alternative wording for
"plural" authors has been presented on the wgchairs list:

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of RFC 3668.

- Copyright Notice: OK

6) Internet-Draft boilerplate: text is OK, but formatting is strange.

- Abstract: OK

7) Filename: broken by strange formatting on first page

- expiration date:  OK

-  Table of contents: OK

Checks based on http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html:

- ragged right: OK

- no hyphens for line breaks: OK

- no footnotes: OK

- status & abstract unnumbered: OK

- no numbered references in boilerplate / abstract: OK

8) author list: present, but mal-formatted

9) Introduction: missing.  (2.2 #5)

- Security Considerations present: OK

10) IANA considerations:  contradictory, (2.2 #7b) seems to apply,
since an OID needs to be allocated.

- split references: OK

11) authors' addresses: need cleanup
(e.g., the first in the list uses normal US postal
address format, but the last in the list doesn't.)

- IPR boilerplate: OK

12) Keywords: text references RFC 2119, but it is missing from
the list of normative references.

13) formal language use: MIB compilation: smilint objects to
pktcSigDevCodecType (an index of pktcSigDevCodecEntry) being
read-only.  It should be not-accessible.

- address examples: OK

14) References:
   [PKT-SP-MGCP-IO9-040113] is never cited.
   [PKT-SP-PROV-IO8-040113] is never cited.
   [PKT-SP-CODEC-IO5-040113] is never cited.
   [PKT-SP-MIB-MTA-I08-040113] is never cited.
   [ETSI TS 101 909-9] is never cited.
   [TR 101 183] is never cited.
   [RFC3289], while referenced in the MIB module, is not
   cited in the text of the document.
   [RFC3291], while referenced in the MIB module, is never cited.
   [RFC3261] is never cited.
   [RFC3435] is never cited.
   MIB module IMPORTS from SNMP-FRAMEWORK-MIB, but it's
   missing from the normative references and not cited in text.

Randy

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

---

From: "David De Reu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 08:35:19 +0200

>    [PKT-SP-CODEC-IO5-040113] is never cited.

Hi,

I believe these have to be "I0" (I zero) instead of "IO" (I oh). Also, the
NCS and PROV spec have in the meantime been updated...

Regards,

David

_____________________________________________________
David De Reu
tComLabs
Stapelplein 70/004 – 9000 Ghent – Belgium
Tel: +32 9 269 22 91 – Fax: +32 9 329 31 74
www.tComLabs.com
_____________________________________________________