[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Review: IESG Agenda and Package for January 22, 2004 Telechat



Bert writes:
> > >   o draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2011-update-05.txt
> > >     Management Information Base for the Internet Protocol (IP)
> (Proposed
> > >     Standard) - 4 of 7
> > >     Token: Margaret Wasserman
[...]
> In fact I had some other (earlier) review comments that seem to not
> have been addressed either.

I also posted additional comments which have not been addressed.
A copy is attached.  (Comment #2 is a "must fix". The other two are
nice-to-have's.)

-Dave
--- Begin Message ---
Shawn Routhier writes:
> Here is the newest revision of the IP MIB.
> I believe it covers all of the current requests
> (see the revision section for details) except
> for Dave Thaler's request to combine the interface
> tables and to either expand the ipv6InterfacePhyscialAddress
> to also be for ipv4 or at least add more text.
> I'm not sure what to do about those yet.  I'm vaguely
> against combining them but don't feel that strongly about it.
> I don't really have any better text though I'll look some
> more and see if previous mail had a better description.

Comments on draft-05 from new implementation experience:

1) It would be helpful to add FragOks to the case diagram 
(assuming it's kept).  Also it is unclear whether 

      FragOks + FragFails == FragReqds

Specifically, is it legal to increment OutDiscards 
instead of FragFails?  If not (my preference), then the 
above equation should be true, and FragReqds could 
be removed as it's redundant and didn't exist in the original
MIB-II.  If it is legal, as note (2) implies, then it would
be good to clarify this in either note (2) under the case 
diagram, or in the FragFails DESCRIPTION.

2) ipIfStatsOutNoRoutes (an interface-specific object) has
a DESCRIPTION which contains:

   As no route can be found for these datagrams the interface
   specific instances are not meaningful for this object.

Since all instances of this object are interface-specific,
this object should be removed as is it not meaningful.
(This is a holdover from the old draft which combined
interface-specific and global instances in the same object).
The same language occurs in the DESCRIPTION of the global
object ipSystemStatsOutNoRoutes, and the sentence should just
be removed from there, as that object has no interface-specific
instances.

3) Nitpick: Change "local generated" to "locally generated"
in the DESCRIPTION of ipSystemStatsOutNoRoutes and
ipIfStatsOutNoRoutes.

-Dave

--- End Message ---