[imss] FW: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-imss-fc-nsm-mib-03.txt

IMSS WG members,

FYI, 

MIB DOctor review. It seems as if it was not
yet posted to the WG list.

Thanks to Orly for the review.

Bert

-----Original Message-----
From: Orly Nicklass [mailto:orly_n@rad.com]
Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 10:19
To: Keith McCloghrie (E-mail)
Cc: vgaonkar@cisco.com; hvivek@cisco.com; sgai@cisco.com; Wijnen, Bert
(Bert); David Black (E-mail); cds@cisco.com
Subject: RE: New Version Notification -
draft-ietf-imss-fc-nsm-mib-03.txt 

Hi,

While  reviewing  the ID I have not found any critical  issue  and in
general it is well written. However, I like to point to some  
possible clarifications that can be added for non-initiated:
1-The term RSCN is used in few places, I think it will be a good idea to
fully state it in first appearance as Registered State Change
Notification. 
2-sections 5.4.3 and 5.4.4. descriptions are a bit confusing, I had to
read it few times to get it clear. Can it be improved somehow?

Other small editorial/administrative suggestions:
1-References Section has
[FC-SW-3]
     "Fibre Channel - Switch Fabric - 3 (FC-SW-3)", ANSI NCITS xxx-xxxx,
     T11/Project 1508-D/Rev 6.6, December 2003.

I am not sure what the xxx-xxxx should be, In fam-mib I saw
[FC-SW-3]
     "Fibre Channel - Switch Fabric - 3 (FC-SW-3)", ANSI INCITS
     384-2004, June 2004.  December 2003.
Having two dates is not ok either, so I suppose both places better  be
fixed during final publication

2-[FC-FAM-MIB]
     DeSanti, C., Gaonkar, V., McCloghrie, K., and S. Gai, "Fibre-
     Channel Fabric Address Manager MIB", Internet-Draft (draft-ietf-
     imss-fc-fam-mib-nn.txt), work-in-progress.

According to the memo 3rd paragraph it is inappropriate to use
Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." so it has
to be changed to
-[FC-FAM-MIB]
     DeSanti, C., Gaonkar, V., McCloghrie, K., and S. Gai, "Fibre-
     Channel Fabric Address Manager MIB",  work-in-progress.

3-in the reference clause of some MIB objects, it is common today to
state the item  within [] and not within (). Example page 11.(very small
issue)
4-section 4 Relationship to Other MIBs, has the word focussed in the
first line, (typo err) should be changed to focused
5-at the very end of the MIB typo err:
t11NsNotifyGroup        NOTIFICATION-GROUP
    NOTIFICATIONS {t11NsRejectRegNotify }
    STATUS current
    DESCRIPTION
           "A collection of notifications for monitoring
           rejections of Name Server regsitrations."
                                                 ^
                                                 registrations

Compilation tools and nits were fine.

Orly

-----Original Message-----
From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com] 
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2005 17:54
To: David Black (E-mail); cds@cisco.com; Keith McCloghrie (E-mail)
Cc: vgaonkar@cisco.com; hvivek@cisco.com; sgai@cisco.com; Orly Nicklass
Subject: FW: New Version Notification -
draft-ietf-imss-fc-nsm-mib-03.txt 

Orly has agreed/volunteered to review this MIB document with a target
completion date of end of october.

Thanks Orly!

Bert

_______________________________________________
imss mailing list
imss@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imss