RE: [Iptel] RE: Comments on draft-ietf-iptel-trip-mib-08.txt
"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Wed, 27 August 2003 07:42 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 DAA02124 for <iptel-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 03:42:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19rtnN-0003VG-7w for iptel-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 02:28:42 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h7R6SdLX013465 for iptel-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 02:28:39 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19rrzI-0003gl-Rl for iptel-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:32:52 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id AAA18871 for <iptel-web-archive@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:32:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19rrzF-00042V-00 for iptel-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:32:49 -0400
Received: from ietf.org ([132.151.1.19] helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19rrzE-00042R-00 for iptel-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2003 00:32:48 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19rmfi-0004j5-LX; Tue, 26 Aug 2003 18:52:18 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19rajd-00064X-Da for iptel@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2003 06:07:33 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA26259 for <iptel@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2003 06:07:26 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19rajZ-0006lw-00 for iptel@ietf.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2003 06:07:29 -0400
Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com ([198.152.12.100]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19rajZ-0006ls-00 for iptel@ietf.org; Tue, 26 Aug 2003 06:07:29 -0400
Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.0/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id h7QA7K1B022925 for <iptel@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2003 06:07:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from IS0004AVEXU1.global.avaya.com (h135-64-105-51.avaya.com [135.64.105.51]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.0/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id h7QA7H1B022871 for <iptel@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Aug 2003 06:07:18 -0400 (EDT)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6375.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1255"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [Iptel] RE: Comments on draft-ietf-iptel-trip-mib-08.txt
Message-ID: <AAB4B3D3CF0F454F98272CBE187FDE2F04550295@is0004avexu1.global.avaya.com>
Thread-Topic: [Iptel] RE: Comments on draft-ietf-iptel-trip-mib-08.txt
Thread-Index: AcNrToP3dukAb1/ATzqKjRV7gxDYOQAVh85g
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>, David Zinman <dzinman@rogers.com>, list iptel <iptel@ietf.org>
Cc: David Zinman <dzinman@somanetworks.com>, "Jon Peterson (E-mail)" <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: iptel-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: iptel-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: iptel@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel>, <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: IP Telephony <iptel.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:iptel@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel>, <mailto:iptel-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Archive: <https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/iptel/>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 13:07:25 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
The 'MIB Doctor' agrees. Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com] > Sent: 26 August, 2003 12:19 AM > To: 'David Zinman'; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); 'list iptel' > Cc: 'David Zinman'; 'Bert Wijnen (E-mail)'; Jon Peterson (E-mail) > Subject: RE: [Iptel] RE: Comments on draft-ietf-iptel-trip-mib-08.txt > > > Seems all fine to me now. > > One remaining NIT, can be addressed during RFC-Editing phase > as far as I am > concerned: > > RFC2119 needs to be referenced NORMATIVELY. > > Jon, as far as I am concerned this one is ready for IETF Last > Call and then > IESG Agenda. I assume that the MIB Doctor (Dan Romascanu) agrees. > > Thanks, > Bert > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) > > Sent: maandag 11 augustus 2003 20:59 > > To: David Zinman; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Romascanu, Dan (Dan); > > list iptel > > Cc: David Zinman; Bert Wijnen (E-mail) > > Subject: RE: [Iptel] RE: Comments on > draft-ietf-iptel-trip-mib-07.txt > > > > > > Looks good. > > I understand that the warnings do not go away. > > But they are "warnings", and so we check if the DESCRIPTION > > clause has the proper instructions to implementers, and they now > > do. So it looks good to me. > > > > Thanks, > > Bert > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: David Zinman [mailto:dzinman@rogers.com] > > > Sent: maandag 11 augustus 2003 20:07 > > > To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Romascanu, Dan (Dan); list iptel > > > Cc: David Zinman; Bert Wijnen (E-mail) > > > Subject: Re: [Iptel] RE: Comments on > > draft-ietf-iptel-trip-mib-07.txt > > > > > > > > > inline: > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com> > > > To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>; "list iptel" > > > <iptel@ietf.org> > > > Cc: "David Zinman" <dzinman@somanetworks.com>; "Bert Wijnen > > (E-mail)" > > > <bwijnen@lucent.com> > > > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 9:20 AM > > > Subject: [Iptel] RE: Comments on draft-ietf-iptel-trip-mib-07.txt > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Dan for your review. > > > > > > > > I think the copyright-year will be addressed by RFC-Editor > > > when it gets > > > there. > > > > So unless there are othe reasons for a respin, I can live > > > with it for now. > > > > But it seems anew rev may be wise because of my additional > > > comments below > > > > > > > > I wonder why sect 14 is needed. I leave this up to TSV > > > AD(s) on how to > > > deal > > > > with it. > > > > > > > > > > I am leaving section 14 in for now. > > > > > > > From a MIB review perspective I have a few additional comments): > > > > - I think that RFC2788 needs to be added to normative > > > references since > > > > this doc IMPORTs from the NETWORK-SERVICES-MIB in RFC2788 > > > > - TRIP-TC module does not have a REVISION clause, which we > > > actually DO > > > > want to have. > > > > > > Added both the reference to RFC 2788 and the REVISION clause > > > in TRIP-TC > > > > > > > - I get these smilint warnings: > > > > .\TRIP-MIB:327: [5] {index-exceeds-too-large} index of row > > > `tripRouteTypeEntry' > > > > can exceed OID size limit by 6 subidentifier(s) > > > > .\TRIP-MIB:511: [5] {index-exceeds-too-large} index of row > > > `tripPeerEntry' can > > > > exceed OID size limit by 6 subidentifier(s) > > > > SMICng complains about the same. I see > > > > 1.3.6.1.2.1.xxxx.1.2.1.6 tripRouteTypePeer > > > > as the first accessible object int tripRouteTypeEntry. So > > > prefix is 11 > > > subids > > > > index objects are 5 integer-based objects and a var size > > > octet string. > > > > so we have 5 plus 1 (for lenght) plus number of octets as > > > index part. > > > > So we have 6 fixed (5 integers plus length value) subids > > > plus one for > > > every > > > > octet in the octet string. So max size for OCTET STRING > > should be > > > > 111 octets, not 117. > > > > Similar calculation for tripPeerEntry seem to tell me max > > > lenght can be > > > 113 > > > > instead of 119. > > > > This makes me thin k that it is kind of strange to ha ve > > > different size > > > for InetAddress, > > > > is it not. Another way to solve these concerns is to add > > > something to > > > the DESCRIPTION > > > > clause that states the implementation issues w.r.t. 128 > > > subids instad of > > > setting > > > > arbitray size constrains in the SYNTAX field (that we > > > may regret if the > > > 128 subid > > > > limit ever gets removed). A good example of text for this > > > would be in > > > > arcEntry in draft-ietf-disman-conditionmib-09.txt or > > > sctpAssocLocalAddrEntry in > > > > draft-ietf-sigtran-sctp-mib-10.txt > > > > - smicng (strict checking) also complains: > > > > > > I have removed the restriction on the index sizes, and > included the > > > description > > > of the 128 limit. However this will not get rid of the warnings. > > > > > > > E: f(trip.mi2), (1629,33) Item "applRFC2788Group" > > > should be IMPORTed > > > > it is not a MUST that you do import it. But as the > > > mib-review-guidelines > > > state, > > > > it would be good to do so to not cause confusion. > > > > > > I have included the IMPORT > > > > > > > > From a generic review > > > > - Missing reference [BCP0014] > > > > > > Added reference to this BCP (RFC2119) > > > > > > > - Ref [RFC2026] probably goes away when this becomes an RFC > > > > > > I'm leaving this in for now. > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Bert > > > > > > > > > > I have also addressed Dan's concern about the copyright year > > > and the area > > > directors in section 14. > > > > > > I will submit the new draft (08) if there are no further comments. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > DZ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ Iptel mailing list Iptel@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iptel
- RE: [Iptel] RE: Comments on draft-ietf-iptel-trip… Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
- RE: [Iptel] RE: Comments on draft-ietf-iptel-trip… Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- RE: [Iptel] RE: Comments on draft-ietf-iptel-trip… Peterson, Jon