Re: Zero as ospfIfRetransInterval

[Acee Lindem <[e-mail]>]

Manral, Vishwas wrote:
> Hi Acee,
>
> If we do not intend to define new variables, we may want to at least put the
> limitation of 0, in the object description in the MIB.

Hi Vishwas,

That sounds like a good idea since any implementation that allows
write access to set the variables to 0 is broken.

Thanks,
Acee

>
> Thanks,
> Vishwas
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Acee Lindem [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 18:16
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: Zero as ospfIfRetransInterval
>
>
> Hi Dan,
>
> Daniel Joyal wrote:
>
>>You're not allowed to change the syntax unless
>>it's equivalent to the old syntax.
>
>
> Even if the old syntax doesn't match the protocol
> specification?
>
>
>
>>So in this
>>case, we would need to deprecate/obsolete.
>
>
> Then I don't think it is worth defining
> new MIB variables given that ospfIfTransitDelay,
> ospfIfRetransInterval, ospfVirtIfTransitDelay, and
> ospfVirtIfRetransInterval have served us thus far.
>
> Other opinions are welcome.
>
> Thanks,
> Acee
>
>
>>-Dan
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Acee Lindem [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> > 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
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
> --
> Acee
>


--
Acee