I performed a Gen-ART review on revision 5 of this document last
February (attached below). Revision 6 addresses all of my concerns
from that version.
However, idnits turns up some new issues, including some new 2119
language introduced without the normal boilerplate. Here's the idnits
output for your convenience:
idnits 2.11.14
tmp/draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-mib-06.txt:
Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see
http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info):
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No issues found here.
Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No issues found here.
Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
** There are 22 instances of too long lines in the document, the
longest
one being 49 characters in excess of 72.
** The document seems to lack a both a reference to RFC 2119 and the
recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC
2119
keywords.
RFC 2119 keyword, line 1157: '...B module. It is RECOMMENDED
that impl...'
RFC 2119 keyword, line 1161: '...ns prior to SNMPv3 is NOT
RECOMMENDED....'
RFC 2119 keyword, line 1162: '... Instead, it is RECOMMENDED
to deploy...'
Miscellaneous warnings:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No issues found here.
Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative
references
to lower-maturity documents in RFCs)
== Unused Reference: 'RFC4001' is defined on line 1190, but no
explicit
reference was found in the text
== Outdated reference: A later version (-13) exists of
draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-proto-11
Summary: 2 errors (**), 2 warnings (==), 0 comments (--).
Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed
information about
the items above.
On Feb 23, 2009, at 4:10 PM, Ben Campbell wrote:
I have been selected as the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART)
reviewer for this draft (for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).
Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.
Document: draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-mib-05
Reviewer: Ben Campbell
Review Date: 2008-02-23
IETF LC End Date: 2008-02-23
IESG Telechat date: unknown
Note: I am not an expert in MIB requirements. (I'm not an expert in
most things I review for Gen-ART, but given the nature of a MIB spec
it may have more impact than for most other docs.)
Summary:
This document is extremely close to ready for publication as a
proposed standard. There are a few nits that should probably be
dealt with before final publication.
Major issues: None.
Minor issues: None.
Nits/editorial comments:
-- Definition of ntpEntTimeResolutionVal:
The comment says "shows the resolution based on 1 second, e.g. "1ms"
translates to 1000". That confused me at first, since 1ms != 1000 s.
I suspect you are talking about the number of divisions in a second,
in which 1000 would make sense--but I didn't immediately get that
from the text.
-- idnits returns following, which I copy without prejudice:
idnits 2.11.04
tmp/draft-ietf-ntp-ntpv4-mib-05.txt:
Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see
http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info):
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You should
update this
to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License Policy
document
(see http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is required
from
December 16, 2008. Version 1.34 of xml2rfc can be used to
produce
documents with boilerplate according to the mentioned Trust
License
Policy document.
-- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978 Section 5.1 on line 17.
-- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978 Section 5.5 updated by RFC
4748 on
line 1221.
-- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979 Section 5 paragraph 1 on
line 1232.
-- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979 Section 5 paragraph 2 on
line 1239.
-- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979 Section 5 paragraph 3 on
line 1245.
** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.4 (updated by
RFC 4748)
Copyright Line.
Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
== No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming
Proposed
Standard
Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
** There are 5 instances of too long lines in the document, the
longest one
being 8 characters in excess of 72.
Miscellaneous warnings:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
== The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work,
but was
first submitted before 10 November 2008. Should you add the
disclaimer?
(See the Legal Provisions document at
http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.).
Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative
references
to lower-maturity documents in RFCs)
No issues found here.
Summary: 3 errors (**), 2 warnings (==), 5 comments (--).
Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed
information about
the items above.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
