Re: [MEXT] Last Call: draft-ietf-mext-nemo-mib (NEMO Management Information Base) to Proposed Standard
"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Thu, 22 January 2009 16:03 UTC
Return-Path: <mext-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: monami6-archive@megatron.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-monami6-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A8EB3A69C6; Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:03:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mext@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B1643A6A72; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 05:53:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.474
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.474 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.125, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id l9OVgFbaj7Wx; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 05:53:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from co300216-co-outbound.avaya.com (co300216-co-outbound.net.avaya.com [198.152.13.100]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 247183A694F; Wed, 21 Jan 2009 05:53:49 -0800 (PST)
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,300,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="158522905"
Received: from unknown (HELO co300216-co-erhwest.avaya.com) ([198.152.7.5]) by co300216-co-outbound.avaya.com with ESMTP; 21 Jan 2009 08:53:32 -0500
Received: from unknown (HELO 307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.140.10]) by co300216-co-erhwest-out.avaya.com with ESMTP; 21 Jan 2009 08:53:31 -0500
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 14:53:10 +0100
Message-ID: <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A04012FAE98@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090113161148.4F49A3A6981@core3.amsl.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Last Call: draft-ietf-mext-nemo-mib (NEMO Management Information Base) to Proposed Standard
Thread-Index: Acl1mcGYVQrzZ93SSNmlYlUPVHzOrgBeppXg
References: <20090113161148.4F49A3A6981@core3.amsl.com>
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:03:18 -0800
Cc: mext@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [MEXT] Last Call: draft-ietf-mext-nemo-mib (NEMO Management Information Base) to Proposed Standard
X-BeenThere: mext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile IPv6 EXTensions WG <mext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/mext>
List-Post: <mailto:mext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext>, <mailto:mext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: mext-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: mext-bounces@ietf.org This review is a super-set of the MIB Doctor review by Bert Wijnen.
This document is not completely ready for being taken into discussion by the IESG. Although there is no major issue with the current version of the document the issues described at #3, #7, #8 and #10 must be fixed. Correcting the other issues raised in the comments is recommended. 1. Section 2.2 (implementation guidance) is incomplete. It should mention the need to support ifTable from IF-MIB as InterfaceIndex is IMPORTed. Also better rename it 'Relationship to other MIB modules'. 2. Compilation is OK - running SMICng (strict checking) results in: W: f(nemo.mi2), (221,5) Row "nemoMrBLEntry" has indexing that may create variables with more than 128 sub-ids W: f(nemo.mi2), (404,5) Row "nemoHaMobileNetworkPrefixEntry" has indexing that may create variables w ith more than 128 sub-ids W: f(nemo.mi2), (540,5) Row "nemoBindingCacheEntry" has indexing that may create variables with more than 128 sub-ids W: f(nemo.mi2), (1092,5) Row "nemoHaCounterEntry" has indexing that may create variables with more th an 128 sub-ids Two are AUGEMENTS, the other two do have a warning in the DESCIRPITON clauses, so OK. 3. The Object nemoMrPrefixRegMode is writable but there is no description of the expected persistency behavior. For read-write object nemoStatus: The value of this object SHOULD remain unchanged across reboots of the managed entity. A SHOULD does not really help a management station as it cannot count for sure on persistency. 4. nemoNotifications OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { nemoMIB 0 } nemoObjects OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { nemoMIB 1 } nemoConformance OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { nemoMIB 3 } Why the Conformance is not under { nemoMIB 2 } as recommended by RFC4181? 5. I see a few times: SYNTAX INTEGER { implicitMode (1), explicitMode (2) } Candidate for a TC. But not a fatal flaw of course 6. I think that according the guidelines in RFC4181, this one nemoHaMobileNetworkPrefixSeqNo OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX Integer32 (1..1024) would better be an Unsigned32. Again, not a fatal flaw. 7. nemoBindingMrFlag OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX TruthValue MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "true(1) indicates that the binding cache entry is from an entity acting as a mobile router. false(0) implies that the binding cache entry is from an entity acting as a mobile node. " But the TC in RFC2579 says: TruthValue ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Represents a boolean value." SYNTAX INTEGER { true(1), false(2) } So it should be false(2) and not false(0) in the DESCRIPTION clause. 8. The document must have normative references to RFC 2863 and RFC 4001 as the MIB module defined in this document IMPORTs objects from the MIB modules defined in these RFCs. 9. No need to carry commented objects in the IMPORTS section. 10. The REVISION date is in the future - points to November 12 and not to January 12. 11. It would be useful to add UNITS clauses to the Counter objects. Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:ietf-announce-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of The IESG > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 6:12 PM > To: IETF-Announce > Cc: mext@ietf.org > Subject: Last Call: draft-ietf-mext-nemo-mib (NEMO Management > Information Base) to Proposed Standard > > The IESG has received a request from the Mobility EXTensions > for IPv6 WG > (mext) to consider the following document: > > - 'NEMO Management Information Base ' > <draft-ietf-mext-nemo-mib-04.txt> as a Proposed Standard > > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and > solicits final comments on this action. Please send > substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by > 2009-01-27. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to > iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the > beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. > > The file can be obtained via > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mext-nemo-mib-04.txt > > > IESG discussion can be tracked via > https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=vie > w_id&dTag=16994&rfc_flag=0 > > _______________________________________________ > IETF-Announce mailing list > IETF-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce > _______________________________________________ MEXT mailing list MEXT@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mext
- [MEXT] Last Call: draft-ietf-mext-nemo-mib (NEMO … The IESG
- [MEXT] [Fwd: RE: Last Call: draft-ietf-mext-nemo-… marcelo bagnulo braun
- Re: [MEXT] Last Call: draft-ietf-mext-nemo-mib (N… Romascanu, Dan (Dan)