[OPS-NM] Comments on draft-farrel-pce-manageability-requirements-00.txt
"Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Thu, 02 November 2006 09:34 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GfYxz-0002Zg-Cc; Thu, 02 Nov 2006 04:34:31 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GfYxy-0002Z5-5T; Thu, 02 Nov 2006 04:34:30 -0500
Received: from co300216-ier2.net.avaya.com ([198.152.13.103]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GfYxw-0000hd-84; Thu, 02 Nov 2006 04:34:30 -0500
Received: from IS0004AVEXU1.global.avaya.com (h135-64-105-51.avaya.com [135.64.105.51]) by co300216-ier2.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.8/Switch-3.1.7) with ESMTP id kA29Y4bs007317; Thu, 2 Nov 2006 04:34:25 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2006 11:34:03 +0200
Message-ID: <AAB4B3D3CF0F454F98272CBE187FDE2F0BA627CE@is0004avexu1.global.avaya.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Comments on draft-farrel-pce-manageability-requirements-00.txt
Thread-Index: Acb+Ygi+IsvFkvVzRWKcCEWIAc0r5Q==
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: pce@ietf.org
X-Scanner: InterScan AntiVirus for Sendmail
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 69a74e02bbee44ab4f8eafdbcedd94a1
Cc: ops-nm@ietf.org, MIB Doctors <mib-doctors@ietf.org>
Subject: [OPS-NM] Comments on draft-farrel-pce-manageability-requirements-00.txt
X-BeenThere: ops-nm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPS Area NM e-mail list <ops-nm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-nm>, <mailto:ops-nm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ops-nm>
List-Post: <mailto:ops-nm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ops-nm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-nm>, <mailto:ops-nm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ops-nm-bounces@ietf.org
First let me salute this I-D. I believe that it's useful for PCE, and an evolution of this work can be useful for other WGs in the Routing Area and in other Areas. A few comments: 1. The organization of the document does not follow its own recommendation in Section 2.4, by not placing the Manageability Considerations section immediately before the Security Considerations section 2. I believe that a more appropriate title for the mandatory section that is being proposed would be 'Operational and Manageability Considerations' 3. In Section 2.1 it would be useful to give an example of a case when a null (Operational and) Manageability Consideration section is justified. For example, when the document extends and updates another document, and the original section covers all necessary information. 4. Section 3 should include a subsection detailing what management operations are expected to be performed as result of the deployment of the protocol - specifically if write operations will be allowed (on routers? on hosts?), if notifications for alarms or other events will be allowed 5. Section 3.1 could be extended to include information about installation and initial deployment. Beyond the timers example Section 3.1 could also include information about default modes of operation and default state of logical control variables. 6. It would be useful to mention in Section 3.2 if read-write or only read-only access is allowed for the information and/or data models 7. Section 3.5 deserves some editing for clarity. Is this about what protocols are recommended or expected to be used for operational or management purposes? Thanks and Regards, Dan _______________________________________________ OPS-NM mailing list OPS-NM@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-nm
- [OPS-NM] Comments on draft-farrel-pce-manageabili… Romascanu, Dan (Dan)