Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-08

"Scott O. Bradner" <sob@sobco.com> Wed, 11 July 2018 20:19 UTC

Return-Path: <sob@sobco.com>
X-Original-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ipv6@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91DD0130E65; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:19:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.108
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.108 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RDNS_NONE=0.793, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Y5gEQQVyW2UK; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sobco.sobco.com (unknown [136.248.127.164]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B0B521277BB; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 13:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A33C6D2AE05; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:19:04 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at sobco.com
Received: from sobco.sobco.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (sobco.sobco.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yikofU7mGJzG; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:19:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.16] (173-166-5-69-newengland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [173.166.5.69]) by sobco.sobco.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 07E3B6D2ADF8; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:19:01 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Subject: Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-08
From: "Scott O. Bradner" <sob@sobco.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOSSMjXnYcsRH6LkY+Acb2Oj7ppi1R0SRBD+QNtAK0nu5-EjyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 16:18:58 -0400
Cc: ops-dir@ietf.org, draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis.all@ietf.org, 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>, ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <881B7FA3-B738-48BB-AB9B-604ED22FB664@sobco.com>
References: <152940455863.13546.13553834320913116631@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAOSSMjXnYcsRH6LkY+Acb2Oj7ppi1R0SRBD+QNtAK0nu5-EjyQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ipv6/WZifB9stOLuu-tW-ZIJ70Ojfcbw>
X-BeenThere: ipv6@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IPv6 Maintenance Working Group \(6man\)" <ipv6.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ipv6/>
List-Post: <mailto:ipv6@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6>, <mailto:ipv6-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 20:19:08 -0000

tnx (I wondered if my review had black holed)

Scott


> On Jul 11, 2018, at 3:58 PM, Timothy Winters <twinters@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
> 
> Hi Scott,
> 
> Thanks for the review.  The name of the network management section has been updated, I think that's technically a better name.
> 
> The working group discussed the SHOULD and based on feedback thought that this should be a MAY.
> 
> Regards,
> Tim
> 
> On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 6:36 AM Scott Bradner <sob@sobco.com> wrote:
> Reviewer: Scott Bradner
> Review result: Ready
> 
> This is an OPS-DIR review of IPv6 Node Requirements
> (draft-ietf-6man-rfc6434-bis-08).
> 
> This document is a compendium of what RFCs need to be implemented or paid
> attention to if someone wants to make a fully operational IPv6 node.  The
> document shows quite clearly that making such a node is a lot of work - i.e.,
> there are a lot of RFCs listed - gone are the days when implementing an
> Internet node involved less documentation than implementing an OSI GOSSIP node.
> 
> All of the changes listed in the two "changes from" sections seem very
> reasonable.
> 
> Relative to the OPS area, there is a "Network Management" section that does a
> good job of listing the possible management technologies to implement.  I do
> not know why the section is called "network management" since the document is
> about nodes not networks (it would be better called "IPv6 Node Management")
> 
> I'm also not sure why management is a MAY - seems to me that it should be a
> SHOULD (a MUST unless you have a good reason not to) - deploying new IPv6 nodes
> that are immune to management does not seem like a good idea these days.
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
> ipv6@ietf.org
> Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
> --------------------------------------------------------------------