Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] MIB doctor review of draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-08.txt (UNCLASSIFIED)

["Cole, Robert G CIV USARMY CERDEC (US)" <[e-mail]>]

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

Benoit,

The indexes in the previous sentence.  I'll clarify and incorporate Randy's 
comment from below as well.

Thanks, Bob

Robert G. Cole
Comm:  443.395.8744
Email: [e-mail]


-----Original Message-----
From: Benoit Claise [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 6:48 PM
To: Randy Presuhn
Cc: Cole, Robert G CIV USARMY CERDEC (US); Robert G. Cole; 
[e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] MIB doctor review of 
draft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-08.txt (UNCLASSIFIED)

Bob, Randy,


   OLSRv2 depends on the neighborhood information that is discovered by
   [RFC6130 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6130> ].  In order to access the 
Objects relating to discovered
   neighbors, the State Group tables of the NHDP-MIB [RFC6779 
<https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6779> ] module
   are aligned with this MIB module.  This is accomplished through the
   use of the AUGMENTS capability of SMIv2 and the definition of
   TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONS in the NHDP-MIB module: specifically the
   NeighborRouterIndex.  These object types are used to develop indexes
   into common NHDP-MIB module and routing protocol State Group tables.
   The values of these objects and the semantics of each individual
   value SHOULD be identical for the two MIB modules within a given SNMP
   context.  This will allow for improved cross referencing of
   information across the two MIB modules within a given SNMP context.
My confusion comes from this question: what are "these objects" in the red 
sentence above?
- The indexes in the previous sentence?
- The object types in the previous sentence?
- The augmented objects?
- something else?

Regards, Benoit


	Hi -


		From: "Cole, Robert G CIV USARMY CERDEC (US)" <[e-mail]> 
<mailto:[e-mail]>
		Sent: May 28, 2013 12:44 PM
		To: 'Benoit Claise' <[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]> , Randy 
Presuhn <[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]> , 
"Robert G. Cole" <[e-mail]> <mailto:[e-mail]>
		Cc: "[e-mail]" 
<mailto:[e-mail]> 
<[e-mail]> 
<mailto:[e-mail]> , 
"[e-mail]" <mailto:[e-mail]>  <[e-mail]> 
<mailto:[e-mail]>
		Subject: RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] MIB doctor review ofdraft-ietf-manet-olsrv2-mib-08.txt(UNCLASSIFIED)

		Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
		Caveats: NONE

		Benoit,

		Not all the tables in the olsrv2-mib are augments to the nhdp-mib.  There
		are some new tables in the olsrv2-mib as well.  Specifically, the
		olsrv2TibAdRemoteRouterSetTable uses an index of syntax '
		NeighborRouterIndex'.  I interpreted Randy's concerns as related to the use
		of the NeighborRouterIndex in this table and in the nhdp-mib to ensure
		consistency of indices.  It sounds as if my text changes need some further
		clarifications.


	If the values need to be consistent in order for this to work correctly
	(and from the comments it sounds like they do) then a "SHOULD" is not
	appropriate.  If something will not work unless done in a particular way
	(e.g. the values of type NeighborRouterIndex here need to match the values
	used in the nhdp-mib in that system) then it's really a "MUST" situation.

	Randy





Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE