Benoit asked me to do an early MIB doctor review of this document. My full comments are in the marked up copy at http://research.microsoft.com/~dthaler/draft-ietf-softwire-dslite-mib-03.pdf (there’s also a .docx version if you replace the .pdf extension with .docx)
I’ve also cc’ed the behave WG on this mail since many of my comments concern the relationship between draft-ietf-behave-nat-mib and the translation parts of this draft. A short summary of the high level issues in my review is: 1) The doc is not aligned with draft-ietf-behave-nat-mib. It currently continues some practices that we’re trying to deprecate as discussed in section 3.1 of draft-ietf-behave-nat-mib. 2) Boilerplate needs to be updated to match latest MIB boilerplate (see inline comments for pointers). 3) Any InetPortNumber object allowing 0 needs to explain what 0 means in that object, as required by RFC 4001. 4) Draft currently requires write support in all implementations. Recommend having a read-only compliance statement since nowadays many folks don’t want write support via MIBs. -Dave
_______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
