Subject: [OPSAWG] draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5066bis

From: Melinda Shore <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2013 17:40:45 -0800

By way of an update, because of issues around staying in
sync with IEEE 802.3's schedule, draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5066bis
is on an expedited schedule.  It's my understanding that the
authors will want to move this document into working group
last call rather soon, so I'd like to ask people to take a
look at the document
(https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5066bis/)
and get comments and questions posted to the mailing list.

Many thanks,

Melinda

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 08:01:05 +0200

> and get comments and questions posted to the mailing list.

I have read draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5066bis-02 and I have no major
issues. I was, however, wondering why there is a new security
considerations sections. Since the I-D does not provide a reasoning
(and I did not follow mailing list discussions), I ended up pulling
RFC 5066 to see what was going on. I arrived at the conclusion that
security considerations for the IF-CAP-STACK-MIB were simply missing
in RFC 5066. Perhaps this reason for 'updated' security considerations
can be simply stated upfront at the end of the Introduction so readers
like me do not have to dig through other documents to find out what is
going on.

Another nit is to perhaps change

   The IF-CAP-STACK-MIB remains under IETF jurisdiction and is
   maintained by the [OPSAWG] working group.

to

   The IF-CAP-STACK-MIB remains under IETF jurisdiction and is
   currently maintained by the [OPSAWG] working group.

since WG structures and responsibilities of course may change in the
IETF.

/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/>