RE: looking for advise on RFC-2618 and 2620

["Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <dromasca@avaya.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barney Wolff [mailto:barney@databus.com] 

> Not to be tedious, but I was hardly suggesting that entities 
> lie about discontinuities.  Rather, perhaps by using a buddy 
> system or a central collection point, avoid them.  The issue 
> is the extent to which outside entities need to be aware of 
> the distributed nature of some managed entity, or whether the 
> entity should take pains to present a unitary appearance to 
> the world.  There seems to be little stylistic guidance on 
> this point, which becomes ever more relevant.  Your last 
> sentence gives fine guidance for a vendor MIB on a particular 
> design, but not, I submit, for a standard.
> 
> Barney Wolff
> 

This is not stylistic guidance, and unitary appearance to the world is
not important, certainly not at the cost of exposing information known
to be inaccurate.  If the system has the capability of detecting
discontinuities at a better granularity, discontinuity objects should
reflect this. 

Dan


--
to unsubscribe send a message to radiusext-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/radiusext/>