Definitions of Managed Objects for Network Address Translators (NATs)
RFC 7659

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 03 and is now closed.

(Spencer Dawkins) Yes

(Martin Stiemerling) Yes

(Jari Arkko) No Objection

(Alia Atlas) No Objection

Deborah Brungard No Objection

(Ben Campbell) No Objection

(Benoît Claise) No Objection

Comment (2015-06-09 for -04)
No email
send info
No objection to the publication of this document, but the Security Considerations boilerplate at http://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/ops/trac/wiki/mib-security has been changed a few months ago. Please update it before publication.

There is a compilation warning related to InetAddress and InetAdressType
The MIB doctors have been engaged, and the authors copied. Email subject = InetAddress and InetAdressType (draft-perrault-behave-natv2-mib-04 compilation). 
Let's follow the MIB doctors advice on this one.

Alissa Cooper No Objection

(Brian Haberman) No Objection

(Joel Jaeggli) No Objection

Comment (2015-06-11 for -04)
No email
send info
Shen Jiang performed the opsdir review.

Barry Leiba No Objection

(Terry Manderson) No Objection

(Kathleen Moriarty) No Objection

Comment (2015-06-09 for -04)
No email
send info
In the Security Considerations section, you have the following 2 tables called out for the possibility of revealing host information (both a security and possible privacy concern):
      *  entries in the natv2AddressMapTable;
      *  entries in the natv2PortMapTable.

Why are the 3.3.3 subscriber table and the 3.3.4 Individual NAT instances included in this list?

The text should also mention that there could be privacy concerns as well if this information were accessible.  The protections already included cover both security and privacy already.

Thank you for addressing the SecDir review:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir/current/msg05651.html

Alvaro Retana No Objection