RE: Review of draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-mtamib-04.txt

Looks good to me.

Eugene.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Francois Mule [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2005 4:07 PM
To: Dave Thaler; Eugene Nechamkin
Cc: [email protected]; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); [email protected]; C. M. Heard
Subject: RE: Review of draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-mtamib-04.txt

Dave Thaler wrote:
> SHOULD fix
> ----------
[snip]
> 13) pktcMtaDevServerDhcp1, pktcMtaDevServerDns1, etc: the DESCRIPTION 
> of
> 
>     these objects is worded as if the type is a string rather than an
>     InetAddress (the "dotted" IP address, etc).  Technically, there's 
> no
>     dots in the value, only in the displayed version of it.

Good point and yes, this may be confusing.
Here's a proposed rewording for all the affected object description clauses (it's a bit of a convoluted rewording but that's the best I could come up with):
Replace:
<         If this object is of value '0.0.0.0', the MTA MUST stop 
<         all provisioning attempts as well as all other activities.
<         If this object is of value '255.255.255.255', it means
          there was no preference given for the primary DHCP 
          server, and, the MTA must follow the logic of RFC2131, and  
          the value of DHCP option 122 sub-option 2 must be 
          ignored."

with:
>         If this object is of an InetAddress value equivalent to 
>         '0.0.0.0', the MTA MUST stop all provisioning attempts 
>         as well as all other activities.
>         If this object is of an InetAddress value equivalent to
>         '255.255.255.255', it means
          there was no preference given for the primary DHCP 
          server, and, the MTA must follow the logic of RFC2131, and  
          the value of DHCP option 122 sub-option 2 must be 
          ignored."

Ok?
Jean-François