Last Call Review of draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-mib-08
review-ietf-tictoc-ptp-mib-08-secdir-lc-salz-2016-03-03-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-tictoc-ptp-mib
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 12)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2016-03-08
Requested 2016-02-25
Draft last updated 2016-03-03
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -08 by Peter Yee (diff)
Genart Telechat review of -08 by Peter Yee (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -08 by Rich Salz (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -08 by Rick Casarez (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Rich Salz
State Completed
Review review-ietf-tictoc-ptp-mib-08-secdir-lc-salz-2016-03-03
Reviewed rev. 08 (document currently at 12)
Review result Has Nits
Review completed: 2016-03-03

Review
review-ietf-tictoc-ptp-mib-08-secdir-lc-salz-2016-03-03

I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's  ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the 
IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat  these comments just like any other last call comments.

Summary: ready with nits.

This is a read-only MIB.  I didn't realize that until the end.  PLEASE put that in the abstract.  Perhaps replace "objects for managing networks" to "objects for monitoring networks"

Also the abstract talks about SNMPv2 and v1.  Why are those mentioned?  And why called out in the abstract as important?  Perhaps add "For backward compatibility," at the start of that last sentence.

The security considerations sections seem fine.
--  
Senior Architect, Akamai Technologies
IM: richsalz at jabber.at Twitter: RichSalz