Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-bridgemib-smiv2-03.txt

Ali Chanaui <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.bridge
Message-ID <[email protected]>
I have another question (it seems to me,
it dedicated rather to [email protected]).

If Port has been done forceDisable(2) or
disabled(2) - does this Port take place in Active
Topology?
I mean: does it forward frames, leran addresses?
Does it participate in GVRP, etc.?

Ali


--- Michael MacFaden <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 26, 2002 at 09:20:20AM +0200, Alex Ruzin
> wrote:
> >Actually I only meant to make the definition for
> this
> >object *semantically* better. Are you agree with my
> proposition
> >"in general", except "MAX-ACCESS"? Do you think,
> that definition
> >of this object has to be improved?
> >If so, I propose
> >
> >    dot1dStpPortEnable OBJECT-TYPE
> >        SYNTAX      INTEGER {
> >                        dummyReadValue(0),
> >                        forceBlock(1),
> >                        forceDisable(2)
> >                   }
> >        MAX-ACCESS  read-write
> >        STATUS      current
> >        DESCRIPTION
> >            "'Force Port State' of the port. Both
> GET and GETNEXT operation
> >              always return value
> dummyReadValue(0). An attempt to write the value
> >             dummyReadValue(0) must cause an
> error."
> >        REFERENCE
> >            "IEEE 802.1D-1998: Section 14.8.2.2"
> >        ::= { dot1dStpPortEntry 4 }
> >
> >Your comments and/or proposition, please?
> 
> The operation of this object is clear but such a
> redefinition
> would not be allowed by IESG mib doctors as it is
> not backward compatible. 
> 
> If this definition were for a new object, then I
> don't see why there is
> a need for a dummyReadValue other than to create a
> write-only style access.
> The SMIv2 dropped write-only access for a purpose
> and as such most MIB 
> doctors would discourage its use.
> 
> I think dot1dStpPortEnable should be left as-is but
> the front matter
> should explain how this object was supposed to
> operate since it 
> is clear that many vendors did not implement it
> according to 
> the original authors intentions.
> 
> Mike MacFaden
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Bridge-mib mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.