Re: [Bridge-mib] Re: dot1dStpPortPriority

Michael MacFaden <mrm@riverstonenet.com> Wed, 07 August 2002 22:50 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA12614 for <bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:50:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id SAA13223 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:51:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA13210; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:51:27 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA13179 for <bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:51:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from agile.yagosys.com (host60.riverstonenet.com [64.95.122.60] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA12611 for <bridge-mib@ietf.org>; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:50:11 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (qmail 8464 invoked by uid 10041); 7 Aug 2002 22:50:52 -0000
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 15:50:52 -0700
From: Michael MacFaden <mrm@riverstonenet.com>
To: bridge-mib@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Bridge-mib] Re: dot1dStpPortPriority
Message-ID: <20020807225052.GI1897@riverstonenet.com>
References: <80256C0E.002C8935.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> <20020807175617.GB1897@riverstonenet.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20020807175617.GB1897@riverstonenet.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-Operating-System: GNU/Linux 2.4.18
Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <bridge-mib.ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org

On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 10:56:17AM -0700, Michael MacFaden wrote:
>Test:
>
>for (i = 0; i <= 255; i++)
>   set dot1dStpPortPriority.X = i; 
>
>Expected Results:
>
>Device mode   | Mgmt App  | result
>802.1D          802.1D       ok   
>802.1D          802.1t/w     ok  (new apps can know the semantic changes) 
>802.1t/w        802.1D       bad value returned for values  241-255
>
>This appears surprising and I am not sure exactly how inocuous 
>the impact would be using an old 802.1D app against 802.1t/w bridges.
> 
>I would support a semantic change to dot1dStpPortPriority.X if we 
>had had the convention of using capabilities bits as found in
>rfc2674 / dot1dDeviceCapabilities such that a
>1493 based app would query a specific bit to know exactly what mode
>the bridge was in before performing any such set operation.

Bert Wjinen pointed out the draft text says '..in steps of 16' 
so the range for bad values would actually include more than 
the listing I presented above. 

Mike


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