Re: [Bridge-mib] Draft-ietf-bridge-bridgemib-smiv2 Issues Resolution

On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 01:22:58PM -0500, David B Harrington wrote:

> UNRESOLVED ISSUES:
> 
> #543: smiv2-06: semantic changes; the following objects changed
> semantics of an existing object: dot1dPortPriority,
> dot1dStpTimeSinceTopologyChange, and dot1dStaticAllowedToGoTo. These
> objects were modified to support 802.1t semantics. Since 802.1t
> implementations have been fielded before this mib becomes available,
> the behavior of current agent implementations might be non-compliant
> with the updated definitions. Even an implementation that claims
> compliance to bridgeCompliance1493 will be impacted because the
> semantics of objects from RFC 1493 have been changed. 

dot1dStpPriority:
dot1dStpPortPriority:

I think the change is really a clarification that only a subset of
the original value range is allowed for bridges that comply to IEEE
802.1t or IEEE 802.1w so I do not see a real problem here for _agent_
implementations. Bridges supporting IEEE 802.1t or IEEE 802.1w likely
reject values which are outside the set of legal values and I would
guess that this is exactly what is currently implemented and deployed.
Can someone confirm my guess?

dot1dStpTimeSinceTopologyChange:

Can't really judge the difference since I do not know enough about
RSTP and tcWhile timers. Can someone explain what the impact of this
change might be?

dot1dStaticAllowedToGoTo:

I am not sure what the issue here is. Did this semantically chance
at all?

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

_______________________________________________
Bridge-mib mailing list
Bridge-mib@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib