RE: FW: Please review and comment: draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t
"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email protected]> Thu, 1 Jan 2004 10:53:49 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.bridge |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <AAB4B3D3CF0F454F98272CBE187FDE2F042599C0@is0004avexu1.global.avaya.com> |
VlanIdAssociation is definitely a bad name - there are other 'VLAN associations' it may be confused with. Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Wijnen, Bert (Bert) > Sent: 31 December, 2003 6:52 PM > To: Bridge-Mib (E-mail) > Subject: [Bridge-mib] FW: Please review and comment: > draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t > > > Any comments? > > Thanks, > Bert > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Ellison [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: woensdag 31 december 2003 20:04 > To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Please review and comment: > draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t > > > Hi Bert, > > Thanks for your reply. > > I think I'd call a TC with a value range of Integer32 { 0 | 1..4094 | > 4095 } a VlanIdReference or VlanIdAssociation. > > This TC would be useful when defining an object that refers > to a vlan. > For example, a table where each entry can be associated with > none, one, > or any vlan. One alternative, with the existing TCs, would be to use > VlanIdOrAny, but have the agent return noSuchInstance when > there is no > association with a vlan. Another alternative, with the existing TCs, > would be to use VlanIdOrNone, and not have use of the special > any/4095 > value. > > Regards, > > Mark > > Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > > >Sorry for late reaction... but I am now again looking at > >this document and the discussion that we had back in October. > > > >inline > > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Mark Ellison [mailto:[email protected]] > >>Sent: donderdag 2 oktober 2003 20:12 > >>To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) > >>Cc: Mark Ellison; [email protected] > >>Subject: Re: Please review and comment: > >>draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.txt > >> > >> > >>Hi Bert, > >> > >>I'm wondering if there could be any mib or pib definition > requiring a > >>range of ( 0 | 1..4094 | 4095 ) for possible values? > >> > >> > >> > >Mark, I have not seen anyone react to this as a option that they > >wanted, so for now I am not going to include it. > >It can of course always be added later if a need arises. > > > >By the way, what woyuld you call/name that TC? > > > >Bert > > > > > >>Regards, > >> > >>Mark > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge-mib mailing list > [email protected] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib >