Re: [OSPF] RE: inconsistency in draft-ietf-ospf-mib-update-11.txt?

Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com> Thu, 16 November 2006 19:54 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GknJY-0001Jt-Uh; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:54:24 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GknJX-0001Jo-Pu for ospf@ietf.org; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:54:23 -0500
Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com ([171.68.10.86]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GknJW-0001O9-F8 for ospf@ietf.org; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:54:23 -0500
Received: from rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com ([64.102.121.159]) by sj-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 16 Nov 2006 11:54:21 -0800
Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-2.cisco.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id kAGJsKua002099; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:54:20 -0500
Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id kAGJsKYJ028011; Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:54:20 -0500 (EST)
Received: from xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.21]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:54:20 -0500
Received: from [10.82.208.5] ([10.82.208.5]) by xfe-rtp-202.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:54:19 -0500
Message-ID: <455CC1EB.4010508@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 14:54:19 -0500
From: Acee Lindem <acee@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (Windows/20061025)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniel Joyal <djoyal@nortel.com>
Subject: Re: [OSPF] RE: inconsistency in draft-ietf-ospf-mib-update-11.txt?
References: <4B7DAC3FEFD35D4A96BDD011699050140A42410C@zrtphxm1.corp.nortel.com>
In-Reply-To: <4B7DAC3FEFD35D4A96BDD011699050140A42410C@zrtphxm1.corp.nortel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Nov 2006 19:54:19.0880 (UTC) FILETIME=[014D6E80:01C709B9]
DKIM-Signature: v=0.5; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; l=1579; t=1163706860; x=1164570860; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim2001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=acee@cisco.com; z=From:=20Acee=20Lindem=20<acee@cisco.com> |Subject:=20Re=3A=20[OSPF]=20RE=3A=20inconsistency=20in=20=20draft-ietf-o spf-mib-update-11.txt? |Sender:=20 |To:=20Daniel=20Joyal=20<djoyal@nortel.com>; bh=jELWdO5mltZUKEj7uGnff9bx+gjK18wr5456BA2JYJo=; b=JDYr1borF5iUARmdr/zLDGGAsc9pDx1+rXPua+OENg5pUCFvlgFSYk+zB7fWIgzphQryVWed 8eWEb5GYHT5BWw2ipkF48btmAxxjY9WqGIQNNS0rJiToUS41LbzrJKp8;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-2; header.From=acee@cisco.com; dkim=pass (s ig from cisco.com/rtpdkim2001 verified; );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: f607d15ccc2bc4eaf3ade8ffa8af02a0
Cc: pgalecki@airvana.com, ospf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ospf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: The Official IETF OSPG WG Mailing List <ospf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/ospf>
List-Post: <mailto:ospf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf>, <mailto:ospf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ospf-bounces@ietf.org

Dan,

Daniel Joyal wrote:
> Lou,
>
> It is inconsistent. Thanks for catching this.
> I don't think there is a reason to make Opaque
> LSA support configurable as it is a backwards
> compatible extension to OSPF, so the verbiage
> about persistence should be deleted.
>
> Any objections?
>   
FWIW, this would be my preference.

Thanks,
Acee
> -Dan 
>
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lou Berger [mailto:lberger@labn.net] 
>> Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 2:07 PM
>> To: Joyal, Daniel (BL60:SF23); pgalecki@airvana.com; 
>> spencer.giacalone@csfb.com
>> Cc: ospf@ietf.org
>> Subject: inconsistency in draft-ietf-ospf-mib-update-11.txt?
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> So, the following is taken from your draft:
>>     ospfOpaqueLsaSupport  OBJECT-TYPE
>>           SYNTAX       TruthValue
>>           MAX-ACCESS   read-only
>>           STATUS       current
>>           DESCRIPTION
>>              "The router's support for Opaque LSA types.
>>
>>               This object is persistent and when written
>>               the entity SHOULD save the change to non-volatile
>>               storage."
>>           REFERENCE
>>              "The OSPF Opaque LSA Option"
>>           ::= { ospfGeneralGroup 16 }
>>
>> The access and description seem inconsistent.  The 
>> description implies that acess should be "read-write".  Am I 
>> missing something?
>>
>> Lou
>>
>>
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> OSPF mailing list
> OSPF@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
>
>   

_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
OSPF@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf