Re: MIB Dr. review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-te-mib-09.txt

[<jcucchiara@mindspring.com>]

Adrian,

Please add a note as to why the bits are reversed for the managed object.

Thanks,
   Joan


----- Original Message -----
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: Tom Petch <nwnetworks@dial.pipex.com>; Thomas D. Nadeau
<tnadeau@cisco.com>; <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
Cc: <jcucchiara@mindspring.com>
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 7:18 AM
Subject: Re: MIB Dr. review of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-te-mib-09.txt


> Hi Tom,
>
> > I am still unsure about MSB/LSB in IANAGmplsAdminStatusFlags.  This has
> reflect
> > (31) while RFC3471 has reflect as bit 0.
> >
> > As Joan says, "The BITS as specified look backwards when viewing the
> TLV".
> >
> > This is fine if one is MSB, the other LSB (although that might be worth
> adding a
> > note about).
>
> You are both right.
> We have reversed the order of the bits in the IANA MIB and also filled the
> gap with "reserved" bits.
>
> Cheers,
> Adrian
>