Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-isis-wg-mib-24.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:31:48 -0500

Background for those who may be unaware of GenART:

GenART is the Area Review Team for the General Area of the IETF.
We advise the General Area Director (i.e. the IETF/IESG chair) by
providing more in depth reviews than he could do himself of documents
that come up for final decision in IESG telechat.  I was selected
as the GenART member to review this document.  Below is my review,
which was written specifically with an eye to the GenART process, but
since I believe that it will be useful to have these comments more
widely distributed, others outside the GenART group are included.

Review criteria for WG submissions: "Is this document a reasonable
contribution to the area of Internet engineering which it covers? If
not, what changes would make it so?"

This draft is basically ready for publication, but has nits that
should be fixed before publication.

This review was done as part of IETF Last Call.  These comments
should be treated as IETF Last Call comments.

I trust that MIB Doctor review has addressed the MIB proper, hence
this review focuses on the rest of the text in the draft.

Nits:

- Section 2, Overview:

   This document is provided to the IETF working group on IS-IS.  It
   describes a management information base for the IS-IS Routing
   protocol as described in ISO 10589 [ISO10589], when it is used to
   construct routing tables for IP networks, as described in RFC 1195
   [RFC1195]. 

Remove first sentence (will no longer be appropriate when this is
published as an RFC0, and rephrase second to "This document describes ...".

- Section 6, Acknowledgements:

Was an extra "r" added to Chris Gunner's name?

- Section 7, Security Considerations

This is ok in its current form, although it would be improved with
references to specific MIB tables/objects, even as examples of how
uncontrolled write access could cause problems.  The references are
not essential, as the threat of uncontrolled write access is both
obvious and compelling as described.

Thanks,
--David
----------------------------------------------------
David L. Black, Senior Technologist
EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
+1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
[email-masked]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
----------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

---

From: "Parker, Jeff" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 14:16:06 -0500

I made three changes
    Overview 
    Gunnerr to Gunner
    Introduced some text about security threats

I would be happy to respin this: is that the right thing to do, or do we
pass this on through the WG for comment?

- jeff parker

myrmidon:~/MIB jeff$ diff mib.head.prev mib.head
120,121c120
< This document is provided to the IETF working group on IS-IS.
< It describes a management information base for the IS-IS
---
> This document describes a management information base for the IS-IS
myrmidon:~/MIB jeff$ diff mib.tail.prev mib.tail
31c31
< Chris Gunnerr, who should be held blameless for the errors
---
> Chris Gunner, who should be held blameless for the errors
83a84,87
> By raising or lowering metrics, traffic may be directed
> to insecure portions of the network.
> By disabling the protocol on an interface, the network
> may be partitioned.

> Background for those who may be unaware of GenART:
...