An Overview of the IETF Network Management Standards
Summary: Needs a YES.
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.
( Ron Bonica ) Yes
( Dan Romascanu ) Yes
( Stewart Bryant ) (was Discuss) No Objection
Comment (2012-03-21 for -07)
Thank you for addressing my concerns
( Gonzalo Camarillo ) No Objection
( Wesley Eddy ) No Objection
Comment (2012-03-13 for -06)
I agree with many of Adrian's DISCUSS points. Other COMMENTs: (1) The last paragraph of section 1.2 should have at least some reference to an I-D or other document to indicate what the authors are talking about (2) Section 3.2 seems odd compared to the rest of the document, as the RFCs mentioned in this section are not management standards; several are just informational RFCs. (3) At the end of Section 3.4, it says that there are two protocols standardized, and then has three bullets underneath. I think the third bullet should be separated out, since its relation to OWAMP and TWAMP is not clearly explained here.
( Adrian Farrel ) (was Discuss) No Objection
Comment (2012-03-20 for -07)
Thanks for working through my Discuss
Stephen Farrell No Objection
Comment (2012-03-15 for -06)
(Sorry, timed out so only got to look at the 1st 30 pages or so so far. Looks like a useful doc though.) - Sometimes (e.g. for COPS) you say not to bother (which is good), but other times you don't (e.g. ACAP), which is a pity. I'd have liked consistent editorialisng like that all over the place. (Though I realise it might not be easy, but even knowing "opinions differ" would be useful.) - FCAPS - where is this "outside the IETF" to which you refer on p36? If its not a secret place, be good to be specific.