Subject: [MIB-DOCTORS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lisp-mib-04.txt

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 08:51:59 +0200

MIB-doctors,

Heads-up. We will be receiving a MIB-doctor request.
The WG last-call should happen after Vancouver.
Any taker?

Thanks to the LISP chairs for being proactive.

Regards, Benoit.

  -------- Original Message --------
Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-lisp-mib-04.txt
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 09:45:25 -0700
From: [email-masked]
Reply-To: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
CC: [email-masked]

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
  This draft is a work item of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol
Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : LISP MIB
	Author(s)       : Gregg Schudel
                           Amit Jain
                           Victor Moreno
	Filename        : draft-ietf-lisp-mib-04.txt
	Pages           : 55
	Date            : 2012-06-25

Abstract:
    This document defines managed objects for the Locator/ID Separation
    Protocol (LISP).  These objects provide information useful for
    monitoring LISP devices, including basic configuration information,
    LISP status, and operational statistics.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-mib

There's also a htmlized version available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-lisp-mib-04

A diff from previous version is available at:
http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-lisp-mib-04

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

_______________________________________________
I-D-Announce mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce
Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

---

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 12:18:52 +0200

Hi,

Why is an early MIB-doctor review required for this document? Is the MIB
module putting any special challenges from a modeling or SMI complexity
point of view? 

Regards,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]]
> On Behalf Of Benoit Claise
> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 9:52 AM
> To: MIB Doctors (E-mail)
> Cc: Joel M. Halpern; Terry Manderson
> Subject: [MIB-DOCTORS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lisp-mib-04.txt
> 
> MIB-doctors,
> 
> MIB-DOCTORS mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors

---

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 12:27:22 +0200

Hi Dan,

Not as far as I know, but I let Joel and Terry answered that one.

My message is mainly: looking at the difficulties in finding a MIB 
doctor for the last MIB module review, combined with the coming holiday 
period, let's plan a little bit in advance if possible. So if someone 
has got some LISP knowledge, and some interest to review this one, just 
let the community know.

Regards, Benoit.

---

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 13:10:18 +0200

Hi Benoit, 

Thanks for the clarification. Having a reviewer assigned and follow the
work in early stages certainly helps, but usually MIB Doctors reviews
are performed after the WG submits the I-D to the IESG, to make sure
that the content is agreed to be stable and correct from the point of
view of the experts in the respective technology. This should be clearly
articulated IMO - so that nobody in the LISP WG waits for the MIB Doctor
review without good reason.

Regards,

Dan

> From: Benoit Claise [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2012 1:27 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: MIB Doctors (E-mail); Joel M. Halpern; Terry Manderson
> Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] I-D Action: draft-ietf-lisp-mib-04.txt
> 
> Hi Dan,
>

---

From: Harrie Hazewinkel <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 13:18:46 +0200

Hallo,

I did a very quick scan to see how much work it would and may know next week
more if I would have the time.

What I noticed was the imports.

In section 8.1 is only one of the imports mentioned, looks odd although the other imports
are the standard SNMP framework (SMI, etc..).

But the document reference for the import (IANA-ADDRESS-FAMILY-NUMBERS-MIB) is 
placed in the informative references and should go in the normative references.

Harrie

>>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

Harrie
[email-masked]

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 14:13:00 +0200

> placed in the informative references and should go in the normative references.

I think the most important thing to tell people is that their MIB
module(s) must compile and that they should read RFC 4181 and check in
particular the appendices. Perhaps we should simply return all MIB
modules right away if they do not even compile. The LISP-MIB module
has some rather serious syntax errors.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>

---

From: Thomas Nadeau <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 08:41:06 -0400

>has some rather serious syntax errors.

	I've suggested a few times that it be done as part of id-nits, or as a
second pass if a MIB is detected.

	--Tom