Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-mib-iptfs-04

Joel Halpern <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com> Thu, 29 September 2022 14:29 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E7D7C14F731; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 07:29:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.809
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.809 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QPY1GwugO6h6; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 07:29:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4FC2C14F72F; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 07:29:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4MdbNf43wqz6G9MY; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 07:29:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1664461794; bh=u6Zy83kIgEKPeq20h8HoCJNDhr3/mpBu/nLjkO1Ofyw=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=ldf7BwUcAsMQ2kiRQLyHszkpaxAMd/k3GIWc6ZrZ6xqhVKApiHDHGXTrP2f75UyuV WPdN7enKsXj7n2S/E0bL1RG3QnTvkyeZu9MdsiQ72OCXDIVcadpZ6qACfy5UjAoJOC Qc+vF39Z524q2Lf4ESUU3xSh9i4+zaAc19LL3oEA=
X-Quarantine-ID: <ucuUo37iK3E9>
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at a2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.23.73] (unknown [50.233.136.230]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4MdbNc67Rfz6G9Jn; Thu, 29 Sep 2022 07:29:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <ba4e45ac-e972-4dba-0e65-5a5a67e012cf@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 10:29:49 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Don Fedyk <dfedyk@labn.net>, "gen-art@ietf.org" <gen-art@ietf.org>
Cc: "draft-ietf-ipsecme-mib-iptfs.all@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-ipsecme-mib-iptfs.all@ietf.org>, "ipsec@ietf.org" <ipsec@ietf.org>, "last-call@ietf.org" <last-call@ietf.org>
References: <166380060147.12969.9531587454280474028@ietfa.amsl.com> <PH7PR14MB5368559C4ACE46DBAB839F82BB579@PH7PR14MB5368.namprd14.prod.outlook.com>
From: Joel Halpern <jmh.direct@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <PH7PR14MB5368559C4ACE46DBAB839F82BB579@PH7PR14MB5368.namprd14.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/jiH8OsjJ_VkOtaIC4tvRuM5fSYA>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-mib-iptfs-04
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gen-art/>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 14:29:58 -0000

That suffices for the document and my review.  Whether it suffices for 
the community and IESG is up to them.  (I wonder about the precedent of 
defining MIBs for monitoring every new thing we do.  But that is up to 
others, not something you can fix in this document.)

Yours,

Joel

On 9/29/2022 10:25 AM, Don Fedyk wrote:
> Hi Joel
>
> The reason this was requested by the community is that there is SNMP management equipment deployed that they would like to be able use for monitoring IP-TFS.
>
> I suggest I add this text to clearify.
>
> OLD:
> The objects defined here are the same as [I-D.ietf-ipsecme-yang-iptfs] with the exception that only operational data is supported. This module uses the YANG model as a reference point for managed objects. Note an IETF MIB model for IPsec was never standardized however the structures here could be adapted to existing MIB implementations.
>
> NEW:
> The objects defined here are the same as [I-D.ietf-ipsecme-yang-iptfs] with the exception that only operational data is supported. By making operational data accessible via SNMP existing network management systems can monitor IP-TFS.  This module uses the YANG model as a reference point for managed objects. Note an IETF MIB model for IPsec was never standardized however the structures here could be adapted to existing MIB implementations.
>
> Doses that suffice?
>
> Thanks
> Don
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joel Halpern via Datatracker <noreply@ietf.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2022 6:50 PM
> To: gen-art@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-ietf-ipsecme-mib-iptfs.all@ietf.org; ipsec@ietf.org; last-call@ietf.org
> Subject: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-ipsecme-mib-iptfs-04
>
> Reviewer: Joel Halpern
> Review result: Almost Ready
>
> 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
>
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-ipsecme-mib-iptfs-04
> Reviewer: Joel Halpern
> Review Date: 2022-09-21
> IETF LC End Date: 2022-10-04
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>
> Summary: Assuming a reasonable answer to one question, this document is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard RFC.
>
> Major issues:
>      The one question I have is "why?"  I could not find anywhere in the
>      document any explanation of why we are defining an SNMP MIB for monitoring
>      ipsecme, nor the equivalent why an operator would choose to use this MIB
>      instead of the YANG based model that it is based upon.
>
> Minor issues: N/A
>
> Nits/editorial comments: N/A
>
>
>