Last Call Review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib-11
review-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib-11-genart-lc-carpenter-2017-01-15-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib
Requested revision No specific revision (document currently at 12)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2017-01-26
Requested 2017-01-12
Authors Kingston Smiler , Venkatesan Mahalingam , Daniel King , Sam Aldrin , Jeong-dong Ryoo
I-D last updated 2017-01-15
Completed reviews Rtgdir Last Call review of -11 by Adrian Farrel (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -11 by Brian E. Carpenter (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -11 by Qin Wu (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Brian E. Carpenter
State Completed
Request Last Call review on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib by General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) Assigned
Reviewed revision 11 (document currently at 12)
Result Ready w/issues
Completed 2017-01-15
review-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib-11-genart-lc-carpenter-2017-01-15-00
Gen-ART Last Call review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib-11

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at
<http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib-11.txt
Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
Review Date: 2017-01-16
IETF LC End Date: 2017-01-26
IESG Telechat date:  

Summary: Ready with minor issues
--------

Comment:
--------

I have not reviewed most details of the MIB module itself. As usual,
I trust the MIB Doctors.

"We know of a handful of implementations (or intent to implement)."
Good. It would have been nice to see an Implementation Status section
under RFC 6982.

Minor issues:
-------------

   At the time of writing, Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) SET
   is no longer recommended as a way to configure MPLS networks as was
   described in RFC 3812 [RFC3812].

RFC3812 is explicit that it should be used for configuration:

   This MIB module should be used in conjunction with the
   companion document [RFC3813] for MPLS based traffic engineering
   configuration and management.

RFC3812 has not been formally updated or obsoleted. Therefore, it seems
to me that the present draft should formally update RFC3812 in this respect.

Does the same issue apply to RFC3813, whose Abstract also states that
it is used to configure an LSR?