Re: FW: Please review and comment: draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t

No thoughts on whether the TC should exist or no.

But if it does, then keep the name simple, don't overload the name, the
identifier, with a description of the semantics

ie VlanIdentifier VlanIds VlanId2 .. good
VlanIdOrNone VlanIdOrNoneOrAny VlanIdAssociation   .. bad

Tom Petch

-----Original Message-----
From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) <[email protected]>
To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) <[email protected]>; Bridge-Mib (E-mail)
<[email protected]>
Date: 01 January 2004 11:22
Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] FW: Please review and comment:
draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t


>OK, but do you think that the TC specified (none, a specific one, or any)
>is a usefull one to have? ANd if yes, would then VlanIdReference be
>a proper name? Or do you have better names suggestions in that case.
>Would VlanIdOrNoneOrAny be better?
>
>Thanks,
>Bert
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:[email protected]]
>> Sent: donderdag 1 januari 2004 9:54
>> To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Bridge-Mib (E-mail)
>> Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] FW: Please review and comment:
>> draft-ietf-ops-vlanid-tc-mib-00.tx t
>>
>> 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