Re: Re: V2 Changes for next RFI v2 MIB (draft 10)

"Randy Presuhn" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.ipcdn
Message-ID <003201c42360$942805e0$7f1afea9@oemcomputer>
Hi -

> From: "Minnie Lu" <[email protected]>
> To: "Eduardo Cardona" <[email protected]>
...
> Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 5:55 PM
> Subject: RE: [ipcdn] Re: V2 Changes for next RFI v2 MIB (draft 10)
...
> How about adding the following in the description ?
> "Non-active row (rowStatus in 'notInService' or 'notReady') MAY be
> destroyed by the agent at reinitialization of the managed system to save
> the resources".

I don't see how this would help interoperability.

RFC 2119 says:
   MAY   This word, or the adjective "OPTIONAL", mean that an item is
   truly optional.  One vendor may choose to include the item because a
   particular marketplace requires it or because the vendor feels that
   it enhances the product while another vendor may omit the same item.
   An implementation which does not include a particular option MUST be
   prepared to interoperate with another implementation which does
   include the option, though perhaps with reduced functionality. In the
   same vein an implementation which does include a particular option
   MUST be prepared to interoperate with another implementation which
   does not include the option (except, of course, for the feature the
   option provides.)

As a practical matter, the proposed language still means that
management applications MUST be prepared to work with
managed devices where the non-active rows disappear on
reboot, as one would expect from the RowStatus definition.
(Neglecting the corner case of reboots completing in less than five
minutes from the creation of the row.)

> This serves a hint to the user that if they wants to persist any rows
> across CMTS reload, besides setting the StorageType to
> nonVolatile(3),  user also needs to set the rowStatus to active.

They would need to do this anyway, based on the definition of
StorageType and of RowStatus.

> As aging non-active rows during the run time, I think it could be vendor
> dependant implementation.
...

This doesn't seem consistent with the definition of RowStatus, unless
you add language to the object's description saying that these things
may be retained indefinitely.

Randy
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.