IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Zero as ospfIfRetransInterval

Daniel Joyal <djoyal@NORTELNETWORKS.COM> Tue, 24 June 2003 12:05 UTC

Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com (cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA13073 for <ospf-archive@LISTS.IETF.ORG>; Tue, 24 Jun 2003 08:05:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (209.119.0.19) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <3.00A2DCC0@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Tue, 24 Jun 2003 8:05:09 -0400
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM by PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 46452414 for OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM; Tue, 24 Jun 2003 08:05:07 -0400
Received: from 47.129.242.57 by WALNUT.EASE.LSOFT.COM (SMTPL release 1.0i) with TCP; Tue, 24 Jun 2003 08:05:07 -0400
Received: from zbl6c012.us.nortel.com (zbl6c012.us.nortel.com [132.245.205.62]) by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h5OC54a28931; Tue, 24 Jun 2003 08:05:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by zbl6c012.corpeast.baynetworks.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <NAFSKRA1>; Tue, 24 Jun 2003 08:05:04 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C33A48.D832C7AE"
Message-ID: <6204FDDE129D364D8040A98BCCB290EF05DD8EF8@zbl6c004.corpeast.baynetworks.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2003 08:05:03 -0400
Reply-To: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
Sender: Mailing List <OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM>
From: Daniel Joyal <djoyal@NORTELNETWORKS.COM>
Subject: Re: Zero as ospfIfRetransInterval
Comments: To: Acee Lindem <acee@redback.com>
To: OSPF@PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM
Precedence: list

You're not allowed to change the syntax unless
it's equivalent to the old syntax. So in this
case, we would need to deprecate/obsolete.

-Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Acee Lindem [mailto:acee@redback.com]
> Sent: Monday, June 23, 2003 11:35 PM
> To: Mailing List; Joyal, Daniel [BL60:NP30:EXCH]
> Subject: Re: Zero as ospfIfRetransInterval
>
>
>
>
> Igor Miroshnik wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > Can anybody clarify the physical sense of assigning
> > ospfIfRetransInterval to zero? RFC1850 allows such an assignment.
>
> I believe UpToMaxAge should range from 1..3600 rather than 0..3600.
>
> Dan - can we change this in the MIB update without
> deprecating variables?
>
> >
> > Thanks
> >
>
>
> --
> Acee
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email