On Fri, May 10, 2013 at 05:40:45PM -0800, Melinda Shore wrote: > 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.
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/> _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
