I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at < http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft. Document: draft-ietf-vrrp-unified-mib-10 Reviewer: Ben Campbell Review Date: 2011-10-03 IESG Telechat date: 2011-10-06 Summary: This draft may be ready for publication as a draft standard. All of the substantive comments from my last call review have been addressed either in the draft or in email. I do have one new concern below, but I am agnostic on whether that should affect publication. Major issues: None Minor issues: -- Section 7, first paragraph: "During the review of this document, It emerged that there are different possible interpretations of [RFC5798]. The Authors of that document and the VRRP working group were unable to reach consensus on which interpretation is correct." That's rather unfortunate, since that RFC specifies the protocol this MIB is _for_. I wish we could do better. From my limited knowledge here, I am agnostic as to whether the disagreement would make a substantive difference in the MIB. I put this in the "minor" section in hopes that it does not--but people more versed in the protocol should think about this. Nits/editorial comments: -- definition of "vrrpv3StatisticsRefreshRate" s/milli-seconds/milliseconds _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf