Re: WG Last Call: Entity MIB for Draft Standard
"C. M. Heard" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.entmib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Tue, 22 Jul 2003 Margaret Wasserman forwarded the following message to the [email protected] list: > This is an Entity MIB working group last call for comments on > advancing the following document as a Draft Standard: > > Title : Entity MIB (Version 3) > Author(s) : K. McCloghrie, A. Bierman > Filename : draft-ietf-entmib-v3-01.txt > Date : May 2003 > > The document can be found at: > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-entmib-v3-01.txt > > Please send substantive comments to the entmib mailing list, and > minor editorial comments to the authors. This last call period > will end on August 5th, 2003. There may be a problem in advancing this document to Draft Standard since it contains a new TC -- PhysicalIndexOrZero -- which has not been used in any object definition. I suppose that this is open to interpretation, but in the AToM MIB WG we assumed for the purposes of advancing RFC 2493 (which contains only TCs) that we'd have to provide evidence that each TC had been used in defining at least one object that was implemented by two vendors. For details see: http://www.ietf.org/IESG/Implementations/RFC2493-Implementation.txt In the case of PhysicalIndexOrZero the problem of not being used in any object definitions (if it is a problem) can be easily overcome by changing entPhysicalContainedIn OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX Integer32 (0..2147483647) MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The value of entPhysicalIndex for the physical entity which 'contains' this physical entity. A value of zero indicates this physical entity is not contained in any other physical entity. Note that the set of 'containment' relationships define a strict hierarchy; that is, recursion is not allowed. In the event a physical entity is contained by more than one physical entity (e.g., double-wide modules), this object should identify the containing entity with the lowest value of entPhysicalIndex." ::= { entPhysicalEntry 4 } to: entPhysicalContainedIn OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX PhysicalIndexOrZero MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The value of entPhysicalIndex for the physical entity which 'contains' this physical entity. A value of zero indicates this physical entity is not contained in any other physical entity. Note that the set of 'containment' relationships define a strict hierarchy; that is, recursion is not allowed. In the event a physical entity is contained by more than one physical entity (e.g., double-wide modules), this object should identify the containing entity with the lowest value of entPhysicalIndex." ::= { entPhysicalEntry 4 } as suggested some time ago by Juergen Schoenwaelder. In my opinion this is a very good idea on its own merits, irrespective of the process question I have raised, and I strongly urge the WG to consider making this change before submitting the document to the IESG. (Indeed, PhysicalIndexOrZero seems to be made exactly for objects such as entPhysicalContainedIn, and in a MIB doctor review I would ask why it was not used.) If the WG agrees to make this change, then the following additional changes (or something like them) would also be needed: OLD: EntPhysicalEntry ::= SEQUENCE { ... entPhysicalContainedIn Integer32, ... } NEW: EntPhysicalEntry ::= SEQUENCE { ... entPhysicalContainedIn PhysicalIndexOrZero, ... } OLD: 4.15.3. Bugfixes The syntax was changed from INTEGER to Integer32 for the entPhysicalContainedIn, entPhysicalParentRelPos, entLogicalIndex, and entAliasLogicalIndexOrZero objects. NEW: 4.15.3. Bugfixes The syntax was changed from INTEGER to Integer32 for the entPhysicalParentRelPos, entLogicalIndex, and entAliasLogicalIndexOrZero objects, and from INTEGER to PhysicalIndexOrZero for the entPhysicalContainedIn object. Best regards, Mike Heard