RE: AD review of: draft-ietf-ipcdn-subscriber-mib-14.txt

Eduardo writes:

> 
> Bert, 
> For the benefot of other authors/editors in the same path of 
> AD evaluation, 
> I see your comment 3 a little deviation of OPS guidelines Appendix C:
> - The descriptor associated with a conceptual table should be of the
>      form xxxZzzTable;  the descriptor associated with the corresponding
>      conceptual row should be of the form xxxZzzEntry;  the name of the
>      associated SEQUENCE type should be of the form XxxZzzEntry;  and
>      the descriptors associated with the subordinate columnar objects
>      should be of the form xxxZzzSomeotherName.
> 
> I presume it is a typo and you would like see extrict 
> compliance to those recommendations
> Any comments?
> 
Not sure I understand. The idea of the Guidelines is to show that (ideally)
all columns wthin one table have a common prefix (that sets them apart
from other objects in the same (or even otehr) MIB module(s) ).

So by inserting the "Cm" for the two objects I listed, that seems to do
the trick. What did you think that the Guidelines are suggesting?

> 
> Thanks 
> 
> Eduardo

.. snip 

> 3. I see:
>      1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.6      docsSubMgtCmFilterTable
>      1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.6.1    docsSubMgtCmFilterEntry
>      1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.6.1.1  docsSubMgtSubFilterDownstream
>      1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.6.1.2  docsSubMgtSubFilterUpstream
>      1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.6.1.3  docsSubMgtCmFilterDownstream
>      1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.6.1.4  docsSubMgtCmFilterUpstream
>    I think that for naming consistency, it might be better to rename
>      1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.6.1.1  docsSubMgtSubFilterDownstream
>      1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.6.1.2  docsSubMgtSubFilterUpstream
>    into something like:
>      1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.6.1.1  docsSubMgtCmSubFilterDownstream
>      1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.6.1.2  docsSubMgtCMmubFilterUpstream
>    so as to make it clearer (from the name/descriptor) that these 2
>    objects exists in the docsSubMgtCmFilterTable.
> 

.. snip 

Bert