RE: pktcSigDevToneWholeToneRepeatCount description indraft-07 of the Signaling MIB

Hi all,

> ...
> This can be messy to implement correctly, particularly when one considers
> how getNext and getBulk work.  As an alternative, I'd suggest:
> 
> |             If the pktcSigDevToneType is set to either of the values
> |             callWaiting1 or callWaiting4, then the value of the
> |             pktcSigDevToneWholeToneRepeatCount object has no
> |             effect on the tone."

Sounds like a good idea. Just one little thing: this applies to
callWaiting1-4, which includes ...2 and ...3. Being a little explicit
doesn't harm, so:

             If the pktcSigDevToneType is set to either of the values
             callWaiting1, callWaiting2, callWaiting3 or callWaiting4,
             then the value of the pktcSigDevToneWholeToneRepeatCount
             object has no effect on the tone.

>From an SNMP point of view, would this wording require that the MTA
has to store the value, without using it, or does this allow the MTA
not even to store a new value?


Regards,

David