RE: MIB/PIB doctor review for draft-ietf-ipsp-ipsecpib-09.txt - general comment/question
<[email protected]> Mon, 5 Apr 2004 17:14:14 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipsp |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <A6D9D7495456414BA08DB655C2AC6712015D2377@bsebe001.americas.nokia.com> |
Added two paragraphs (3rd and 4th of Section 3) to explain the structure and mapping between this PIB and RFC3585. The mapping is easy to see - In many cases, even the attribute names are the same. Best regards Man > -----Original Message----- > From: ext Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: March 16, 2004 10:24 AM > To: Li Man.M (Nokia-NRC/Boston); '[email protected]' > Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; > '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' > Subject: MIB/PIB doctor review for draft-ietf-ipsp-ipsecpib-09.txt - > general comment/question > > > > What I am missing in the prose section before the actual > PIB definition is a desciption of how these PIB Classes > match or fit to the PCIM (RFC3060), PCIMe (RFC3460), and > IPsec IM (RFC3585). Maybe that is just me... but I thought > that it should be easier to see the mapping (if it does > exist). I would also expect a similar modularity (abstraction > level) as in those 3 Information Model RFCs. Maybe that is just > me ?? > > Thanks, > Bert >