Subject: [rbridge] Advancement of draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-mib-03.txt

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2011 12:30:27 -0400

Hi,

We have determined that there is WG consensus to advance
draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-mib-03.txt and have requested RFC publication
of that draft. The PROTO statement is pasted below.

Thanks,
Donald & Erik
=============================

(1.a) Who is the Document Shepherd for this document? Has the
      Document Shepherd personally reviewed this version of the
      document and, in particular, does he or she believe this
      version is ready for forwarding to the IESG for publication?

   Donald Eastlake is the Document Shepherd.
   I have reveiwed the document and believe it is ready.

(1.b) Has the document had adequate review both from key WG members
      and from key non-WG members?

   I believe the review has been good. At our request, Dan Romascanu
   did a review and his comments were resolved.

(1.c) Does the Document Shepherd have concerns that the document
      needs more review from a particular or broader perspective,
      e.g., security, operational complexity, someone familiar with
      AAA, internationalization or XML?

   No, althogh it needs and, I assume, will receive MIB Doctor review.

(1.d) Does the Document Shepherd have any specific concerns or
      issues with this document that the Responsible Area Director
      and/or the IESG should be aware of? Has an IPR disclosure
      related to this document been filed?

   No specific concerns. No IPR disclosure has been filed for this
   document.

(1.e) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it
      represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with
      others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and
      agree with it?

   The consensus for the document is solid but not very broad. MIB's
   are somewhat of an acquired taste.

(1.f) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme
      discontent?

   No.

(1.g) Has the Document Shepherd personally verified that the
      document satisfies all ID nits? (See the Internet-Drafts Checklist
      and http://tools.ietf.org/tools/idnits/). Has the document
      met all formal review criteria it needs to, such as the MIB
      Doctor, media type and URI type reviews?

   Yes. The only formal review required is MIB Doctor which has not
   yet been done.

(1.h) Has the document split its references into normative and
      informative? Are there normative references to documents that
      are not ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear
      state?

   References are split into normative and informative and all
   normative references are IETF standards except one which is an IEEE
   standard.

(1.i) Has the Document Shepherd verified that the document IANA
      consideration section exists and is consistent with the body
      of the document?

   The document has an IANA Considerations section and requires only
   the allocation of one code point in the MIB OID tree.

(1.j) Has the Document Shepherd verified that sections of the
      document that are written in a formal language, such as XML
      code, BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc., validate correctly in
      an automated checker?

   No but the author has verified the MIB with libsmi as recommended
   by Dan Romascanu.

(1.k) The IESG approval announcement includes a Document
      Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document
      Announcement Write-Up:

 Technical Summary

   This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
   for use with network management protocols.  In particular it defines
   objects for managing RBridges, which are devices that implement the
   TRILL base protocol standard.

 Working Group Summary

   There was some controversy on the WG mailing list concerning MIB
   structure but this turned out to be a misunderstanding and has been
   resolved. The document now has WG consensus.

 Document Quality
   [insert results of MIB Doctor review here]
_______________________________________________
rbridge mailing list
[email-masked]
http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge