Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-system-mgmt

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

Randy,
> Hi -
>
>> From: Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>
>> Sent: Dec 9, 2013 8:11 AM
>> To: NETMOD Working Group <[e-mail]>
>> Subject: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-system-mgmt
> ...
>> I understand the MIB variables don't map 1:1, but telling that
>>              os-name        part of the sysDescr MIB variable
>>              os-release     part of the sysDescr MIB variable
>>              os-version     part of the sysDescr MIB variable
>>              machine?       part of the sysDescr MIB variable
>> ... is also useful info.
> Kinda sorta.  One *might* find os-name, os-release, and os-version
> in sysDescr, but their presence is only a "should", and cannot be
> relied upon.  Same goes for "machine" if one treats that as "hardware
> type".
Ack. That should be mentioned then.

Regards, Benoit
>
> ...
>> NEW:
>>    leaf location {
>>           type string;
>>           description
>>             "The system location. In most cases, the "location" of an "interface" entry
> This text is broken.  The "location" is *not* the location of an interface;
> it is the location of the system.
>
>>             is mapped to sysLocation. sysLocation is defined as a DisplayString [RFC2579]
>>             which uses a 7-bit ASCII character set. An implementation that performs this
>>             mapping MUST restrict the allowed values for "location" to match the
>>             restrictions of sysLocation.";
> I understand why folks might do this, but it still gives
> me heartburn.  I believe it was a mistake when we failed
> to extend the syntax of these MIB objects to permit
> Unicode, and I believe it's a mistake to perpetuate the
> limitation here. I recognize that this is a messy problem,
> but surely we can do better than this, even if it's as
> simple a hack as having "location" and "legacy-location".
>
> Randy
>
> .
>