[MIB-DOCTORS] Advice please: AUTH48 [LB]: RFC 6445 <draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-21.txt>

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Fri, 04 November 2011 17:58 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: mib-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mib-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE50B11E808A for <mib-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Nov 2011 10:58:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6fZmbh1cYVmq for <mib-doctors@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Nov 2011 10:58:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC95411E8085 for <mib-doctors@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Nov 2011 10:58:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pA4HwFdc024560; Fri, 4 Nov 2011 17:58:15 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id pA4HwDfI024547 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 4 Nov 2011 17:58:14 GMT
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: mpls-chairs@tools.ietf.org, mib-doctors@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 17:58:11 -0000
Message-ID: <073001cc9b1b$51f08040$f5d180c0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Content-language: en-gb
Thread-index: AcybGuHoqHf9iwUuQNuRcooIpIPzGA==
Subject: [MIB-DOCTORS] Advice please: AUTH48 [LB]: RFC 6445 <draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-21.txt>
X-BeenThere: mib-doctors@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: MIB Doctors list <mib-doctors.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mib-doctors>, <mailto:mib-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mib-doctors>
List-Post: <mailto:mib-doctors@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mib-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors>, <mailto:mib-doctors-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 17:58:17 -0000

The RFC Editor has observed a number of problems in the MIB modules. The
shepherd write-up says:

> (1.j) Has the Document Shepherd verified that sections of the
> document that are written in a formal language, such as XML
> code, BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc., validate correctly in
> an automated checker?
>
> The document is a MIB and compiles clean.

The document editor has responded to the RFC Editor that these are just compiler
warning and:

> These warnings can safely be ignored.  Making the changes necessary to
> avoid those warnings will require significant changes to the MIB, and will
> not be of any real substantive change for implementations

All the problems are SMICng warnings concerning the names of bits (see below).

It seems to me that changing the names of these bits would not have a
significant impact on the document. Indeed, it would only take 15 seconds to
apply.

There is some possibility that early implementations will suffer, but that is
life.

What I don't know is whether these warnings are important in any way, or are
just convention that we would normally stick to, but flunked during earlier
review.

Thanks for any advice,
Adrian

Using SMICng, we are receiving the following warnings all 3 MIB modules:

W: f(rfc6445a.mi2), (428,33) Name of bit "ARHopSessionAttrFlagsUnsupported" must
start with a lowercase letter Name of bit changed to
"aRHopSessionAttrFlagsUnsupported"

W: f(rfc6445a.mi2), (429,33) Name of bit "LocalProtectionDesired" must start
with a lowercase letter Name of bit changed to "localProtectionDesired"

W: f(rfc6445a.mi2), (430,33) Name of bit "LabelRecordingDesired" must start with
a lowercase letter Name of bit changed to "labelRecordingDesired"

W: f(rfc6445a.mi2), (431,33) Name of bit "SEStyleDesired" must start with a
lowercase letter Name of bit changed to "sEStyleDesired"

W: f(rfc6445a.mi2), (432,33) Name of bit "BandwidthProtectionDesired" must start
with a lowercase letter Name of bit changed to "bandwidthProtectionDesired"

W: f(rfc6445a.mi2), (433,33) Name of bit "NodeProtectionDesired" must start with
a lowercase letter Name of bit changed to "nodeProtectionDesired"

W: f(rfc6445a.mi2), (452,34) Name of bit "ARHopRROSubObjectFlagsUnsupported"
must start with a lowercase letter Name of bit changed to
"aRHopRROSubObjectFlagsUnsupported"

W: f(rfc6445a.mi2), (453,34) Name of bit "LocalProtectionAvailable" must start
with a lowercase letter Name of bit changed to "localProtectionAvailable"

W: f(rfc6445a.mi2), (454,34) Name of bit "LocalProtectionInUse" must start with
a lowercase letter Name of bit changed to "localProtectionInUse"

W: f(rfc6445a.mi2), (455,34) Name of bit "BandwidthProtection" must start with a
lowercase letter Name of bit changed to "bandwidthProtection"

W: f(rfc6445a.mi2), (456,34) Name of bit "NodeProtection" must start with a
lowercase letter Name of bit changed to "nodeProtection"

*** 0 errors and 11 warnings in parsing