Re: Sanity check on StorageType

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de>]

On Sat, Sep 13, 2003 at 10:34:58PM +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:

> in document draft-ietf-ipcdn-subscriber-mib-12.txt you will
> find (in the MODULE-COMPLIANCE):
> 
>    OBJECT diffServDataPathStorage
>        SYNTAX StorageType { nonVolatile(3) }
>        DESCRIPTION
>            "An implementation is only required to support nonvolatile
>             storage."
> 
> Do we believe this makes sense and is wise?
> I have my doubts. There is nothing illegal here, but it feels
> strange to me, no?

Perhaps the boxes in question only have non-volatile memory and 
no good old volatile ram anymore...  It kind of looks strange since 
one would expect volatile(2) but you really have to ask the WG what 
they indended to achieve.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany