Re: [Bridge-mib] FW: Please review and comment: draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t

"Tom Petch" <nwnetworks@dial.pipex.com> Fri, 02 January 2004 12:16 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA03700 for <bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 07:16:32 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AcODi-0005eX-WE for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 07:16:03 -0500
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i02CG2Z7021718 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 07:16:02 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AcODg-0005dp-Eu; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 07:16:00 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AcOCq-0005dK-95 for bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 07:15:08 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA03662 for <bridge-mib@ietf.org>; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 07:14:59 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AcOCf-0002bO-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 07:14:57 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AcO8N-0002MZ-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 07:10:34 -0500
Received: from pengo.systems.pipex.net ([62.241.160.193]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AcNzf-0001yy-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Fri, 02 Jan 2004 07:01:31 -0500
Received: from tom3 (1Cust31.tnt2.lnd4.gbr.da.uu.net [62.188.131.31]) by pengo.systems.pipex.net (Postfix) with SMTP id 9DD004C0021B; Fri, 2 Jan 2004 12:00:19 +0000 (GMT)
Message-ID: <014c01c3d127$f23b2d00$0301a8c0@tom3>
Reply-To: "Tom Petch" <nwnetworks@dial.pipex.com>
From: "Tom Petch" <nwnetworks@dial.pipex.com>
To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>, "Bridge-Mib (E-mail)" <bridge-mib@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Bridge-mib] FW: Please review and comment: draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t
Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2004 11:32:10 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.2106.4
x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib>, <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <bridge-mib.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:bridge-mib@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib>, <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

No thoughts on whether the TC should exist or no.

But if it does, then keep the name simple, don't overload the name, the
identifier, with a description of the semantics

ie VlanIdentifier VlanIds VlanId2 .. good
VlanIdOrNone VlanIdOrNoneOrAny VlanIdAssociation   .. bad

Tom Petch

-----Original Message-----
From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) <bwijnen@lucent.com>
To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) <dromasca@avaya.com>om>; Bridge-Mib (E-mail)
<bridge-mib@ietf.org>
Date: 01 January 2004 11:22
Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] FW: Please review and comment:
draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t


>OK, but do you think that the TC specified (none, a specific one, or any)
>is a usefull one to have? ANd if yes, would then VlanIdReference be
>a proper name? Or do you have better names suggestions in that case.
>Would VlanIdOrNoneOrAny be better?
>
>Thanks,
>Bert
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com]
>> Sent: donderdag 1 januari 2004 9:54
>> To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Bridge-Mib (E-mail)
>> Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] FW: Please review and comment:
>> draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t
>>
>> VlanIdAssociation is definitely a bad name - there are other
>> 'VLAN associations' it may be confused with.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org
>> > [mailto:bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
>> > Sent: 31 December, 2003 6:52 PM
>> > To: Bridge-Mib (E-mail)
>> > Subject: [Bridge-mib] FW: Please review and comment:
>> > draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t
>> >
>> > Any comments?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Bert
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Mark Ellison [mailto:ellison@ieee.org]
>> > Sent: woensdag 31 december 2003 20:04
>> > To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
>> > Cc: mibs@ops.ietf.org
>> > Subject: Re: Please review and comment:
>> > draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t
>> >
>> > Hi Bert,
>> >
>> > Thanks for your reply.
>> >
>> > I think I'd call a TC with a value range of Integer32 { 0 |
>> 1..4094 |
>> > 4095 }  a VlanIdReference or VlanIdAssociation.
>> >
>> > This TC would be useful when defining an object that refers
>> > to a vlan.
>> > For example, a table where each entry can be associated with
>> > none, one,
>> > or any vlan.  One alternative, with the existing TCs, would
>> be to use
>> > VlanIdOrAny, but have the agent return noSuchInstance when
>> > there is no
>> > association with a vlan. Another alternative, with the
>> existing TCs,
>> > would be to use VlanIdOrNone, and not have use of the special
>> > any/4095
>> > value.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Mark
>> >
>> > Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
>> >
>> > >Sorry for late reaction... but I am now again looking at
>> > >this document and the discussion that we had back in October.
>> > >
>> > >inline
>> > >
>> > >>-----Original Message-----
>> > >>From: Mark Ellison [mailto:ellison@ieee.org]
>> > >>Sent: donderdag 2 oktober 2003 20:12
>> > >>To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
>> > >>Cc: Mark Ellison; mibs@ops.ietf.org
>> > >>Subject: Re: Please review and comment:
>> > >>draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.txt
>> > >>
>> > >>Hi Bert,
>> > >>
>> > >>I'm wondering if there could be any mib or pib definition
>> > requiring a
>> > >>range of ( 0 | 1..4094 | 4095 )  for possible values?
>> > >>
>> > >Mark, I have not seen anyone react to this as a option that they
>> > >wanted, so for now I am not going to include it.
>> > >It can of course always be added later if a need arises.
>> > >
>> > >By the way, what woyuld you call/name that TC?
>> > >
>> > >Bert
>> > >
>> > >>Regards,
>> > >>
>> > >>Mark
>_______________________________________________
>Bridge-mib mailing list
>Bridge-mib@ietf.org
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib



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