Re: [mpls] Review of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-linear-protection-mib-11

[Loa Andersson <[e-mail]>]

Brian, et.al.,

We could of course update 3812 (and 3813), though this would probably 
lead to another discussion on what updates means.

What is refereed to is that there is now another preferred method for
configuration - netconf/yang. In fact this draft doe not change 3812 or
propose a change, so there can not be an update. The document is just
noting that there is a change in the environment, and that for the time
being it will use RFC 3812 as specified.

Maybe Benoit have a take on this?

/Loa

On 2017-01-16 06:04, Brian Carpenter wrote:
> Reviewer: Brian Carpenter
> Review result: Ready with Issues
>
> 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?
>

-- 


Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail]
Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: [phone]