Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] MIB Dr. review of draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-mib-01

[Kishore Tiruveedhula <[e-mail]>]

Hi Joan,
     Please find the attached doc. I will post new draft when it opens for
the draft submission at https://datatracker.ietf.org/submit/
And please see below email inline [Kishore].

Please let me know if any more comments or if miss anything.

Thanks,
Kishore

On 3/21/17, 1:18 PM, "Joan Cucchiara" <[e-mail]> wrote:

>HI Kishore,
>
>Yes, please change to NOT use hyphens.    Could you update doc and send
>me a
>version of the draft when the MIB compiles cleanly?
>
>Thanks,
>-Joan
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: MIB-DOCTORS [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
>> Kishore Tiruveedhula
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2017 1:03 PM
>> To: Loa Andersson; [e-mail]; [e-mail]
>> Cc: [e-mail]
>> Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] MIB Dr. review of draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-mib-01
>> 
>> Hi Joan,
>> 
>>   Thanks for the review.
>> 
>> I addressed your comments and attached new draft. I will post it later
>>as
>cut
>> off date passed for IETF98.
>> I will double check with the MIB compiler before posting the draft.
>>Please
>let
>> me know if any comments in the attached new draft.
>> 
>> One question about hyphen. With the hyphen, it is giving below warning.
>> Without hyphen should I changed to single word like
>> ³upstreamLabelAssignment" ?
>> 
>> ----------------
>> ibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:279: [4] {hyphen-in-label} warning: named bit
>> `upstream-label-assignment' must not include a hyphen in SMIv2
>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:283: [4] {hyphen-in-label} warning: named bit
>> `prot-lsr' must not include a hyphen in SMIv2
>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:286: [4] {hyphen-in-label} warning: named bit
>> `node-prot' must not include a hyphen in SMIv2
>> --------------
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Kishore
>> 
>> 
>> On 3/21/17, 7:38 AM, "Kishore Tiruveedhula" <[e-mail]>
>>wrote:
>> 
>> >Hi Loa,
>> >    I missed Joan's below email.
>> >I will address all the comments today.
>> >
>> >Thanks,
>> >Kishore
>> >
>> >Sent from my iPhone
>> >
>> >> On Mar 21, 2017, at 6:55 AM, Loa Andersson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Authors,
>> >>
>> >> This draft is expiring, I also have the comments below from Joan.
>> >>When do you think this will  be fixed?
>> >>
>> >> /Loa
>> >>
>> >>> On 2017-02-11 10:20, Joan Cucchiara wrote:
>> >>> Hello Authors,
>> >>>
>> >>> This draft has come a long way since the previous version.  Thanks
>> >>>for that.
>> >>>
>> >>> Please make sure the MIB compiles with smilint prior to MIB review
>> >>>as it  is difficult to review a  MIB Module that doesn't compile.
>> >>>
>> >>> Also, please add compliance statements and conformance groups.
>> >>>
>> >>> Comments below.
>> >>> Thanks,
>> >>> -Joan
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> output from smilint compiler:
>> >>> ------------------------------
>> >>> While processing your request the following errors and/or warnings
>> >>> have been found:
>> >>>
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:76: [5] {date-year-2digits} warning: date
>> >>>specification `2016092600Z' contains a two-digit year representing
>> >>>`1920'
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:76: [2] {date-month} date specification
>> >>>`2016092600Z' contains an illegal month
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:76: [2] {date-hour} date specification
>> >>>`2016092600Z' contains an illegal hour
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:76: [4] {date-in-past} warning: date
>> >>>specification `2016092600Z' predates the SMI standard
>> >>>
>> >>> Then after that was fixed, more errors:
>> >>>
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:268: [2] {identifier-redefined} redefinition
>> >>> of identifier `mplsLdpPeerCapabilityEntry'
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:254: [6] {previous-definition} info: previous
>> >>> definition of `mplsLdpPeerCapabilityEntry'
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:268: [1] {internal-other} syntax error,
>> >>> unexpected COLON_COLON_EQUAL, expecting OBJECT
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:271: [5] {internal-flushing} warning:
>> >>> flushing recent incorrect declaration, see previous error(s)
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:279: [4] {hyphen-in-label} warning: named
>> bit
>> >>> `upstream-label-assignment' must not include a hyphen in SMIv2
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:283: [4] {hyphen-in-label} warning: named
>> bit
>> >>> `prot-lsr' must not include a hyphen in SMIv2
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:286: [4] {hyphen-in-label} warning: named
>> bit
>> >>> `node-prot' must not include a hyphen in SMIv2
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:386: [1] {internal-other} syntax error,
>> >>> unexpected UPPERCASE_IDENTIFIER, expecting COLON_COLON_EQUAL
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:417: [5] {internal-flushing} warning:
>> >>> flushing recent incorrect declaration, see previous error(s)
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:482: [2] {description-missing} description
>> >>> missing in object definition
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:482: [1] {internal-other} syntax error,
>> >>> unexpected MAX_ACCESS, expecting COLON_COLON_EQUAL
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:493: [5] {internal-flushing} warning:
>> >>> flushing recent incorrect declaration, see previous error(s)
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:1060: [1] {internal-other} syntax error,
>> >>> unexpected '}', expecting UPPERCASE_IDENTIFIER or
>> >>> LOWERCASE_IDENTIFIER or NUMBER
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:1060: [5] {internal-flushing} warning:
>> >>> flushing recent incorrect declaration, see previous error(s)
>> >>> mibs/MPLS-MLDP-STD-MIB:1061: [1] {internal-other} syntax error,
>> >>> unexpected STATUS
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> General Comments (please check throughout document)
>> >>>
>> >>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >>>---
>> >>>---------
>> >>> *) Need to get this to compile using smilint.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> *) When other documents (RFCs or drafts) are mentioned, there should
>> >>> be a reference notation given.  Please fix this throughout the
>>draft.
>> 
>> [Kishore] Fixed.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> *) Naming Conventions:  Please refer to RFC4181 (MIB guidelines).
>> >>> Basically, the naming conventions used in this MIB Module do not
>> >>> follow the recommended naming conventions (Appendix C).
>> >>>
>> >>> Prefix should be used throughout for all objects/tables/entries etc.
>> >>> So "mplsMldp" needs to be used consistently.
>> 
>> [Kishore] All objects have mplsMldp. The only table
>> mplsLdpPeerCapabilityTable is not defined in the LDP MIB. I added in the
>> mLDP MIB.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> *) Think there are more AUGMENTS relationships between RFC3815
>> >>> Tables and Tables in this MIB Module but they are not defined as
>> >>> AUGMENTS within the MIB Module but are described as such within the
>> >>> document sections.   Please make sure that the relationships between
>> >>> these tables are clarified.
>> >>> e.g.  mplsMldpPeerCapabilityTable and mplsLdpPeerTable
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Section 2.
>> 
>> [Kishore] Ok. I will more text to clarify this. As the
>> mplsLdpPeerCapabilityTable is not defined the STD-LDP-MIB, this table is
>> defined in MLDP MIB.
>> 
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> Remove the first paragraph.  Think this is understood.
>> >>>
>> >>>   [[CREF1: The title and text for this section has been copied from
>the
>> >>>   official boilerplate, and should not be modified unless the
>>official
>> >>>   boilerplate text from the OPS Area web site has changed.  See
>RFC4818
>> >>>   section 3.1 for a discussion of the boilerplate section.]]
>> 
>> [Kishore] Removed this section.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Section 4. Overview
>> >>>
>> >>> *) Make sure the RFCs/drafts listed are referenced as being in the
>> >>>References Section (probably the Normative References section).  Some
>> >>>of  them are, some of the are not.  Be consistent.
>> 
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> *) Not very helpful to list a bunch of documents and not specify
>>which
>> >>> features (i.e. specify the sections/sub-sections) appear in which
>> >>> documents.
>> >>> We already can see the list of documents in the References section
>>so
>> >>> unless features/sections/subsections from these docs are specified
>>per
>> >>> document, then don't see this as adding information.
>> 
>> [Kishore] Fixed.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> *) Also, some out of date listings, so need to update these.
>> >>> ietf-rtgwg-mofrr is an RFC as of 8/2015
>> 
>> [Kishore] Changed to RFC7431.
>> 
>> 
>> >>> ietf-mpls-mldp-node-protection is an RFC as of 1/2016
>> 
>> [Kishore]  Changed to RFC 7715.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> *) typo:  ...stats per per Interface
>> 
>> [Kishore] Fixed.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Section 6.2
>> >>>
>> >>>   mplsMldpSessionStatsTable : This table contains the number of mLDP
>> >>>   FECs received and advertised to particular LDP session.
>> >>>
>> >>> s/to particular LDP session/ to a particular LDP session/
>> 
>> [Kishore] Fixed.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Section 7.
>> >>>
>> >>>   There are ten scalars, listed below are defined for this MIB
>>module.
>> >>>
>> >>> *) above sentence is awkward.  Maybe something like:
>> >>>
>> >>> The following scalars are defined in this MIB Module:
>> 
>> [Kishore] Fixed.
>> 
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Section 8.1
>> >>>
>> >>> *) s/from LDP peer/from an LDP peer/
>> 
>> [Kishore] Fixed.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Section 8.5
>> >>>
>> >>> typo in section's title
>> >>> s/Upstreaam/Upstream/
>> 
>> [Kishore] Done.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Section 8.6
>> >>>
>> >>> s/gives the information/gives information/
>> 
>> [Kishore] Done.
>> 
>> >>> s/about number/about the number of/  (2 occurrences)
>> 
>> [Kishore] Done.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> s/received on particualr/received on a particular/
>> 
>> [Kishore] Done.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> Please note:  will review the other sections once the MIB compiles
>>and
>> >>> compliance statements are added.
>> 
>> [Kishore] Ok.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> References Section:
>> >>> *) Some references (drafts) out of date and RFCs are out of order
>> >>> References.  Please update.
>> 
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>> Other
>> >>> *) Please remove Appendix A and Appendix B (and regenerate the Table
>> of
>> >>> Contents.)
>> 
>> [Kishore] Done.
>> 
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Loa Andersson                        email: [e-mail]
>> >> Senior MPLS Expert                          [e-mail]
>> >> Huawei Technologies (consultant)     phone: [phone]
>
>