RE: FW: Communication of Alarm Info Workging Group lastcallcomplete
"Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email protected]> Mon, 4 Oct 2004 21:10:58 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.disman |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <AAB4B3D3CF0F454F98272CBE187FDE2F038A9E8B@is0004avexu1.global.avaya.com> |
See in-line. Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel > Sent: 04 October, 2004 5:15 PM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Disman > (E-mail) (E-mail) > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Disman] FW: Communication of Alarm Info > Workging Group lastcallcomplete > > > Thanks Dan, > > [Lou Berger copied on this email as Ed. of this draft] > [My DISMAN posting will probably bounce]-: > > > I suggest the following changes: > > > >In Section 3.1.3 > > > >OLD > > > > In this document we define one new Error Code. The Error Code uses > > the value TBA (by IANA) and is referred to as "Alarms". > The values > > used in the Error Values field are the same as the values used for > > IANAItuProbableCause in the Alarm MIB [ALARM-MIB]. Note > these values > > are managed by IANA, see http://www.iana.org. > > > >NEW: > > > > > > In this document we define one new Error Code. The Error Code uses > > the value TBA (by IANA) and is referred to as " GMPLS > Alarms". The values > > used in the Error Values field are the same as the values used for > > IANAItuProbableCause in the Alarm MIB [ALARM-MIB]. Note > these values > > are managed by IANA, see the IANA Considerations Section > > I see two changes. > 1. "Alarms" --> "GMPLS Alarms" > I'm not sure why you propose this change. The alarms > indicated are NOT GMPLS alarms. They > are Alarm MIB alarms indicated using GMPLS signaling. I > presume that the Alarm MIB does > not refer to them as GMPLS Alarms. Sorry - I was confused and believed that you are suggesting to extend the TC with a new value specific to GMPLS. This being not the case, I am tabling my sugestion. > 2. Reference changed from URL to IANA Considerations Section > I have no strong feeling on this, but it seems to me that the > IANA Considerations Section > is intended to list IANA actions for this draft, not to > provide reference information for > the reader. I anything, I would tend to strike the whole > sentence ["Note these..."] as > irrelevant. > I believe that readability for the RFC user cannot harm. I would not fight to death about this however, and striking out the phrase is OK to me as well. > > >In the IANA Considerations Section: > > > >OLD: > > > > Additionally, Section 3.1.3 defines a new Error Code. > The Error Code > > is "Alarms" and uses Error Values defined in the Alarm MIB [ALARM- > > MIB]. The suggested Error code value is 28. > > > >NEW: > > > >Additionally, Section 3.1.3 defines a new Error Code. The Error Code > > is "GMPLS Alarms" and uses Error Values similar to > IANAItuProbableCause > > defined in the Alarm MIB [ALARM-MIB]. The Error code > value allocated by IANA > > is TBD, see http://www.iana.org. > > I see points: > 1. Change of "Alarms" to "GMPLS Alarms". As above. > 2. Addition of "similar to ...." > This is good, but must use "which are the same as..." > 3. Removal of suggested value. > We MUST suggest a value to IANA. This is a complex code space and > it is highly helpful to IANA that we suggest a value. > 4. Reference to IANA URL. As before, this section is provided > for IANA's > benefit. So no URL is needed. > > > >In Section 6.1 > > > >OLD: > > > >[ALARM-MIB] Chisholm, S., Romascanu, D., "Alarm MIB", > > draft-ietf-disman-alarm-mib-18.txt, February 2004 > > > >NEW: > > > >[ALARM-MIB] Chisholm, S., Romascanu, D., "Alarm MIB", > > RFC 3877, September 2004 > > Yup. We noticed that. Well done! > > > What I suggest is to require from IANA a code value for > 'GMPLS Alarms' , and then use > the text as suggested. > > Thanks. Yes, we could do this, but have no need as the > established procedures for managing > the RSVP code points are well understood by the community and > by IANA. Thus, the actual > value will be supplied just prior to RFC Ed. If there is a > need for resolution of this > particular value sooner than that, we will of course apply to > IANA under the provisions of > draft-kompella-rsvp-change-02.txt > > Cheers, > Adrian > > > > >