Re: [pim] draft-ietf-pim-bsr-mib-05.txt [was: RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for May 8, 2008 Telechat]

That wfm (works for me)

Bert Wijnen

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Bharat Joshi [mailto:bharat_joshi@infosys.com]
> Verzonden: vrijdag 2 mei 2008 18:01
> Aan: 'Bert Wijnen - IETF'; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; 'David Ward';
> 'rainab@gmail.com'
> CC: 'MIB Doctors'; 'pim@ietf.org'
> Onderwerp: RE: draft-ietf-pim-bsr-mib-05.txt [was: RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW:
> PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for May 8,2008 Telechat]
>
>
>
> Hi Bert,
>
>     In this case, I would like to say that I can add "Zone index
> zero is not valid in this table" similar to what is mentioned in
> IP MCAST MIB. I can also add the range '(1..4294967295)' for
> these two objects.
>
>     I shall wait for some more time if I get any more comments on
> this draft and will publish another version after fixing this.
>
> Thanks,
> Bharat
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bert Wijnen - IETF [mailto:bertietf@bwijnen.net]
> > Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 4:45 PM
> > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); David Ward; Bharat Joshi; rainab@gmail.com
> > Cc: MIB Doctors; pim@ietf.org
> > Subject: RE: draft-ietf-pim-bsr-mib-05.txt [was: RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW:
> > PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for May 8,2008 Telechat]
> >
> > The errors are shwon indeed when I use STRICT checking with SMICng.
> > As I stated, I can live with it.
> > But (as per the rfc4181 quoted text below), it would be good to
> > make it clear in the DESCRIPTION clause that zero is indeed
> > a valid value for the index. That was/is not clear to me from
> > the text in the DESCRIPTION clauses. For example
> >
> >    pimBsrElectedBSRZoneIndex OBJECT-TYPE
> >        SYNTAX     InetZoneIndex
> >        MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
> >        STATUS     current
> >        DESCRIPTION
> >                "The zone index uniquely identifies the zone on a
> >                device to which this Elected BSR is attached. There
> >                is one entry for each zone in ipMcastZoneTable.
> >                Scope-level information for this zone can be extracted
> >                from ipMcastZoneTable in IP MCAST MIB."
> >
> > It speaks about the "index uniquely identifies".
> > It referes to the IP MCAST MIB module.
> > In there I see a lot of places where it states:
> >             listener address applies only within the given zone.  Zone
> >             index zero is not valid in this table."
> >
> > And also, when used as an index there, it DOES exclude zero:
> >
> >    ipMcastZoneIndex OBJECT-TYPE
> >        SYNTAX     InetZoneIndex (1..4294967295)
> >
> > So... If zero is value in the BSR MIB, then fine, but I would
> like to see
> > that made explicit, so that everyone is sure that it did not happen by
> > accident.
> >
> > The DESCRIPTION clause of InetZoneIndex states:
> >
> >          The zone index may contain the special value 0, which refers
> >          to the default zone.  The default zone may be used in cases
> >          where the valid zone index is not known (e.g., when a
> >          management application has to write a link-local IPv6
> >          address without knowing the interface index value).  The
> >          default zone SHOULD NOT be used as an easy way out in
> >          cases where the zone index for a non-global IPv6 address
> >          is known."
> >
> > So a zero valeu can mean "default zone" meaning that it is not known.
> > So is it a valid value?
> >
> > THe
> >
> >
> >
> > Bert Wijnen
> >
> > > -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> > > Van: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com]
> > > Verzonden: vrijdag 2 mei 2008 13:00
> > > Aan: Bert Wijnen - IETF; David Ward; bharat_joshi@infosys.com;
> > > rainab@gmail.com
> > > CC: MIB Doctors; pim@ietf.org
> > > Onderwerp: RE: draft-ietf-pim-bsr-mib-05.txt [was: RE:
> [MIB-DOCTORS] FW:
> > > PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for May 8,2008 Telechat]
> > >
> > >
> > > Bert,
> > >
> > > Using libsmi the MIB module compiles cleanly.
> > >
> > > Is this again a case where smicng is more strict?  This may
> be rather a
> > > warning case at worst and not an error case.
> > >
> > > As per RFC4181:
> > >
> > >    -   Unsigned32 with a range that excludes zero is RECOMMENDED for
> > >        most index objects.  It is acceptable to include zero in the
> > >        range when it is semantically significant or when it is used as
> > >        the index value for a unique row with special properties.  Such
> > >        usage SHOULD be clearly documented in the DESCRIPTION clause.
> > >
> > > Assuming zero is a valid error and that a better explanation
> is provided
> > > about the 'special case' in the DESCRIPTION I do not see a problem.
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Bert Wijnen - IETF [mailto:bertietf@bwijnen.net]
> > > > Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 12:56 PM
> > > > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); David Ward;
> > > > bharat_joshi@infosys.com; rainab@gmail.com
> > > > Cc: MIB Doctors; pim@ietf.org
> > > > Subject: draft-ietf-pim-bsr-mib-05.txt [was: RE:
> > > > [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: PRELIMINARY Agenda and Package for May
> > > > 8,2008 Telechat]
> > > >
> > > > W.r.t.
> > > >
> > > > >   o draft-ietf-pim-bsr-mib-05.txt
> > > > >     PIM Bootstrap Router MIB (Proposed Standard) - 3 of 11
> > > > >     Token: David Ward
> > > >
> > > > I get:
> > > >
> > > >   C:\bw\smicng\work>smicng bsr.inc
> > > >   E: f(bsr.mi2), (402,21) Index item "pimBsrCandidateBSRZoneIndex"
> > > >      must be defined with syntax that includes a range
> > > >   E: f(bsr.mi2), (541,21) Index item "pimBsrElectedBSRZoneIndex"
> > > >      must be defined with syntax that includes a range
> > > >
> > > >   *** 2 errors and 0 warnings in parsing
> > > >
> > > > The InetZoneIndex ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION from RFC4001 is the
> > > > SYNTAX for those 2 objects. And that TC does not include a range.
> > > >
> > > > The DESCRIPTION clause of the TC explains that value zero is
> > > > a special value. It iss unclear to me if that special value
> > > > of zero is a valid/acceptable value for the INDEX objects. If
> > > > not, then it might be good to use
> > > >
> > > >        SYNTAX     InetZoneIndex (1..4294967295)
> > > >
> > > > If it is a valid value, then I can live with the Error msg.
> > > > The error msg could still be suppressed by doing:
> > > >
> > > >        SYNTAX     InetZoneIndex (0..4294967295)
> > > >
> > > > And if you do so, then you explicitly indicate that zero is
> > > > indeed a valid value for the INDEX object.
> > > >
> > > > A NIT on the securitry Considerations:
> > > >
> > > >    Even if the network itself is secure (for example by
> using IPSec),
> > > >
> > > > s/IPSec/IPsec/
> > > >
> > > > I would not be urprised if Russ makes that comment too.
> > > >
> > > > Bert
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
> **************** CAUTION - Disclaimer *****************
> This e-mail contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
> intended solely for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not
> the intended recipient, please notify the sender by e-mail and
> delete the original message. Further, you are not to copy,
> disclose, or distribute this e-mail or its contents to any other
> person and any such actions are unlawful. This e-mail may contain
> viruses. Infosys has taken every reasonable precaution to
> minimize this risk, but is not liable for any damage you may
> sustain as a result of any virus in this e-mail. You should carry
> out your own virus checks before opening the e-mail or
> attachment. Infosys reserves the right to monitor and review the
> content of all messages sent to or from this e-mail address.
> Messages sent to or from this e-mail address may be stored on the
> Infosys e-mail system.
> ***INFOSYS******** End of Disclaimer ********INFOSYS***
>

_______________________________________________
pim mailing list
pim@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pim