RE: FW: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-entmib-v3-07.txt
"Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <[email protected]> Wed, 2 Feb 2005 16:54:19 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.entmib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15503C7A05E@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> |
Andy writes: > > At 07:05 AM 2/2/2005, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > >Can the author/editor and/or the WG react please. > >I need (if possible) an answer by tomorrow (Thursday) 11am US > >eastern at the latest (that is, if we want to try and get this > >approved this week). > > what are the edits? CLEI URI to CLEI URN. reference > RFC 2396 -> RFC 3986. Any other nits? Can't you just carry > forward an edit list without an update? > I can do that if the WG agrees that that is indeed what we want to do. I cannot just make such changes without checking back with at least the authors/editors or the WG. > It's not like these updates require anybody to comment. > Who's going to object to fixing a nit? > I can do those fixes with an RFC-Editor note if we agree that is what we want to do. Bert > > >Bert > > Andy > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] > >> [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf > >> Of Wijnen, Bert (Bert) > >> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 01:05 > >> To: Entmib-wg (E-mail) > >> Subject: [Entmib] FW: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-entmib-v3-07.txt > >> > >> > >> Feedback from IESG > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of > >> Ted Hardie > >> Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 23:28 > >> To: [email protected] > >> Subject: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-entmib-v3-07.txt > >> > >> > >> Minor, but should be fixed. The document currently says: > >> > >> entPhysicalUris OBJECT-TYPE > >> SYNTAX OCTET STRING > >> MAX-ACCESS read-write > >> STATUS current > >> DESCRIPTION > >> "This object contains additional identification > >> information > >> about the physical entity. The object > contains URIs and > >> therefore the syntax of this object must > conform to RFC > >> 2396, section 2. > >> > >> Multiple URIs may be present and are > separated by white > >> space characters. Leading and trailing white space > >> characters are ignored. > >> > >> If no additional identification information > is known or > >> supported about the physical entity the object is not > >> instantiated. A zero length octet string may also be > >> returned in this case." > >> REFERENCE > >> "RFC 2396, Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic > >> Syntax, section 2, August 1998." > >> > >> This should be updated to the new URI RFC and a pointer to the > >> appropriate syntax restrictions. This text also does not limit > >> the types of URIs which may be present. If they are limited, > >> an enumerated list should be included. > >> > >> The document also uses "CLEI URI" to refer to a URN in the CLEI > >> namespace. That's technically correct, but it would be easier > >> to understand if CLEI URN was used. Here's an example: > >> > >> The entPhysicalUris object may be used to encode for > >> example a URI > >> containing a Common Language Equipment Identifier > (CLEI) URI for > >> the managed physical entity. The URN name space for CLEIs is > >> defined in [RFC CLEIURN], and the CLEI format is defined in > >> [T1.213][T1.213a]. > >> > >> Simply swapping out (CLEI) URI for (CLEI) URN would be fine. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Entmib mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > >> >