Last Call Review of draft-ietf-mpls-p2mp-te-mib-
I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.
These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security area
directors. Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments
just like any other last call comments.
This document describes managed objects for point-to-multipoint
MultiProtocol Label Switching based traffic engineering.
This draft reads well to me and the examples of use of the managed objects
are very helpful.
In Section 4.2, several MPLS-TE-STD-MIB objects with changed semantics in
the context of MPLS-TE-P2MP-STD-MIB are described, for example
mplsTunnelXCPointer. The text states that in the case of P2MP MPLS, the
value for several of these objects SHOULD be set to 0 (or 0.0). Should not
this be a "SHALL/MUST" rather than a "SHOULD" for P2MP TE systems? This
since if a P2MP TE system does not set them to zero but to some other
value, it seems as if a legacy P2P MPLS systems reading the same objects
could become confused (I realize that not setting these objects' values to
zero will not hurt other P2MP TE systems as they ignore these objects
In Section 8, Even though the acronyms VACM and USM are spelled out in
-09, it would be helpful for the reader with a reference to the documents
specifying these modules (RFC 3415 and RFC 3414, I believe)