IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Tue, 10 December 2013 12:23 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACC981ADFA2 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 04:23:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.793] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2iGA_E3bo_uW for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 04:23:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (unknown [109.74.15.94]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06D9C1ADEB7 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 04:23:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (138.162.241.83.in-addr.dgcsystems.net [83.241.162.138]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6FAFB37C02A; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:23:30 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 13:23:30 +0100
Message-Id: <20131210.132330.264841086201302929.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: randy_presuhn@mindspring.com
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <16284021.1386618041338.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
References: <16284021.1386618041338.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5rc2 on Emacs 23.4 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-system-mgmt
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 12:23:36 -0000

Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Hi -
> 
> >From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
> >
> >            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".

I don't think it makes much sense to have two such similar objects in
this data model.

One option would be to simply remove the connection between
sysLocation and this new location leaf (and same for contact),
essentially making the snmp object the "legacy" object.


/martin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email