IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [OPSAWG] VMM-MIB: Proposal: Joe -3 (Was Re: Comments on draft-asai-vmm-mib-04)

"ietfdbh" <ietfdbh@comcast.net> Thu, 29 August 2013 14:03 UTC

Return-Path: <ietfdbh@comcast.net>
X-Original-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D83D421E805A for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 07:03:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -100.437
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.437 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_NET=0.611, RDNS_NONE=0.1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 uVSwQRhLUwTT for <opsawg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 07:03:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from qmta08.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta08.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:43:76:96:62:80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0474211E80FA for <opsawg@ietf.org>; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 07:02:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from omta01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.11]) by qmta08.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Jcn11m0050EZKEL58e2zvW; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 14:02:59 +0000
Received: from JV6RVH1 ([67.189.237.137]) by omta01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id Je2y1m01i2yZEBF3Me2zDK; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 14:02:59 +0000
From: ietfdbh <ietfdbh@comcast.net>
To: 'Hirochika Asai' <panda@hongo.wide.ad.jp>, 'Joe Marcus Clarke' <jclarke@cisco.com>
References: <19163971.1377286860237.JavaMail.root@mswamui-andean.atl.sa.earthlink.net> <5217BDBF.5000601@cisco.com> <753543F6-4804-4BBC-A3D2-456EF9DF8DC9@hongo.wide.ad.jp>
In-Reply-To: <753543F6-4804-4BBC-A3D2-456EF9DF8DC9@hongo.wide.ad.jp>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 10:02:57 -0400
Message-ID: <00c701cea4c0$773fd070$65bf7150$@comcast.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQEvnxkvGHF8wN8u8xsY/lUUKb+7DwFJ1MnPAfIOWZ+a0GFLkA==
Content-Language: en-us
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1377784979; bh=Ip01/y2ssIYcTy6RC4AkZT119YbiAohOmUlQ8grpu/w=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=BAIhVCfxh5qJqFQkWEK+RZYbaEza/8w7yvoOV09h5diekw9g9eleKfwZhxeo3/hOu n+fmN91ObRTPHJcmp8KvAtRJBd71wp009BwAzQeg28siqtizFoFmy/CzmNP57fOmp2 9H+NIxc7x2ODMp15iJIkQlB3e0PxJjAdAYdU36S8rPO/LRo2bo6U0HUXC8kx86TxhP vRUKlAHU/Ik/594cjyLRVVT5dZJNLjgfpEhDVPTv0PJg5lXxARFP3DVDBmwzB5DMmP meHI8SL4rVCAHYHIugm2rKYYMctlg23mgkZ53Bvaj+T9dUeBfbMrge957P4gY8PHbT UQRjo0kFs6LJQ==
Cc: opsawg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] VMM-MIB: Proposal: Joe -3 (Was Re: Comments on draft-asai-vmm-mib-04)
X-BeenThere: opsawg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: OPSA Working Group Mail List <opsawg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/opsawg>
List-Post: <mailto:opsawg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg>, <mailto:opsawg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 14:03:05 -0000

> >> I really don't like the idea of standards prohibiting potentially
> >> useful functionality.

I would like a better understanding/description of the problems that would
be caused by having persistent values for these objects  in some
implementations and volatile values in other implementations, to justify the
MUST NOT usage.

I would like a better understanding of the benefits that might lead some
implementers to have persistent values in their implementations; what
possible useful functionality could we be prohibiting by making this a MUST
NOT?


David Harrington
ietfdbh@comcast.net
+1-603-828-1401

> -----Original Message-----
> From: opsawg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:opsawg-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Hirochika Asai
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:28 AM
> To: Joe Marcus Clarke
> Cc: opsawg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] VMM-MIB: Proposal: Joe -3 (Was Re: Comments on
> draft-asai-vmm-mib-04)
> 
> 
> As for the read-write objects, i.e., vmMinCpuNumber, vmMaxCpuNumber,
> vmMinMem, and vmMaxMem, I changed the following phrase for the next
> version of the draft.
> 
> (deleted) Changes to this object may not persist across restarts of the
> hypervisor
> (added) Changes to this object must not persist across restarts of the
> hypervisor
> 
> Thank you.
> Hirochika
> 
> 
> On Aug 24, 2013, at 4:53 AM, Joe Marcus Clarke <jclarke@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> >> Just to be absolutely clear...
> >> Are you requesting that the normative text state that the values
> >> assigned to these object-types SHOULD NOT or MUST NOT persist across
> >> reboots?
> >>
> >> I really don't like the idea of standards prohibiting potentially
> >> useful functionality.
> >
> > I was asking for the latter since this MIB is not about configuration.
> > I think it would be a POLA violation if one vendor did a persistent
> > implementation and some did a volatile implementation.
> 
> --
> Hirochika Asai <panda@hongo.wide.ad.jp>, The University of Tokyo
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OPSAWG mailing list
> OPSAWG@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email