Last Call Review of draft-ietf-bfd-tc-mib-06

Request Review of draft-ietf-bfd-tc-mib
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2014-05-13
Requested 2014-04-16
Authors Thomas Nadeau, Zafar Ali, Nobo Akiya
Draft last updated 2014-04-30
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -06 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -07 by Christer Holmberg (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -08 by Christer Holmberg
Secdir Last Call review of -05 by Warren Kumari (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Christer Holmberg 
State Completed
Review review-ietf-bfd-tc-mib-06-genart-lc-holmberg-2014-04-30
Reviewed rev. 06 (document currently at 08)
Review result Ready with Nits
Review completed: 2014-04-30


I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <>


Document:                         draft-ietf-bfd-tc-mib-06


Reviewer:                           Christer Holmberg


Review Date:                     30 April 2014


IETF LC End Date:             28 April 2014


IETF Telechat Date:         15 May 2014


Summary:        The document is almost ready for publication, with a couple of minor nits that the authors may want to address.


Major Issues: None


Minor Issues: None


Editorial nits:


Section 1 (Introduction):






s/”two MIB modules”/”two Management Information Base (MIB) modules”




Section 4 (Security Considerations):





The last sentence says:


“Therefore, this document has no impact on the security of the Internet.”


That sounds a little funny :) Wouldn’t it be better to simply say:


“Therefore, this document does not introduce any additional security considerations.”