RE: compliances in: draft-ietf-rmonmib-raqmon-mib-10.txt

I will do a quick rev and submit later today.

Regards,

Dan


 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:[email protected]] 
> Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2006 11:09 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: RMON WG (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: compliances in: draft-ietf-rmonmib-raqmon-mib-10.txt
> 
> Sorry I did not check immediately when you submitted new rev.
> You have done (in MODULE-COMPLIANCE):
> 
> 
>            OBJECT raqmonParticipantAddrType
>            MIN-ACCESS read-only
>            DESCRIPTION
>               "Only IPv4 and IPv6 addresses need to be supported"
> 
>            OBJECT raqmonParticipantAddr
>            MIN-ACCESS read-only
>            DESCRIPTION
>               "Only IPv4 and IPv6 addresses need to be supported"
> 
>           OBJECT raqmonParticipantPeerAddrType
>            MIN-ACCESS read-only
>            DESCRIPTION
>               "Only IPv4 and IPv6 addresses need to be supported"
> 
>          OBJECT raqmonParticipantPeerAddr
>            MIN-ACCESS read-only
>            DESCRIPTION
>               "Only IPv4 and IPv6 addresses need to be supported"
> 
> And that causes SMICng to tell me:
> 
>   C:\bwijnen\smicng\work>smicng raqmon.inc
>   W: f(raqmon.mi2), (1170,20) Row "raqmonParticipantAddrEntry" does
>      not have a consistent indexing scheme - index item
>      raqmonParticipantAddrType from base row raq
>      monParticipantEntry is not defined as an index item
>   W: f(raqmon.mi2), (1355,19) MIN-ACCESS value identical to access
>      specified for "raqmonParticipantAddrType"
>   W: f(raqmon.mi2), (1360,19) MIN-ACCESS value identical to access
>      specified for "raqmonParticipantAddr"
>   W: f(raqmon.mi2), (1365,18) MIN-ACCESS value identical to access
>      specified for "raqmonParticipantPeerAddrType"
>   W: f(raqmon.mi2), (1370,17) MIN-ACCESS value identical to access
>      specified for "raqmonParticipantPeerAddr"
> 
>   *** 0 errors and 5 warnings in parsing
> 
> The first warning we understand and know it is done 
> intentionally, so I will suppress it with -Z option in SMICng
> 
> The other ones are proper warning. They are not fatal flwas.
> They can be suppressed by not inclusing a MIN-ACCESS in this case.
> 
> But they also do not help in a machine readable definition of 
> the fact that only IPv4 and IPv6 need to be supported. It is 
> just in the text in the DESCRIPTION clause.
> 
> The proper way to do it (or so I think) is:
> 
>            OBJECT raqmonParticipantAddrType
>            SYNTAX  InetAddressType { ipv4(1), ipv6(2) }
>            DESCRIPTION
>               "Only IPv4 and IPv6 addresses need to be supported"
> 
>            OBJECT raqmonParticipantAddr
>            SYNTAX  InetAddress (SIZE(4|16))
>            DESCRIPTION
>               "Only IPv4 and IPv6 addresses need to be supported"
> 
>           OBJECT raqmonParticipantPeerAddrType
>            SYNTAX  InetAddressType { ipv4(1), ipv6(2) }
>            DESCRIPTION
>               "Only IPv4 and IPv6 addresses need to be supported"
> 
>          OBJECT raqmonParticipantPeerAddr
>            SYNTAX  InetAddress (SIZE(4|16))
>            DESCRIPTION
>               "Only IPv4 and IPv6 addresses need to be supported"
> 
> Let me know if you want to do a quick rev or if you rather 
> have me address it with an RFC-Editor note for now.
> 
> Bert
>