On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, C. M. Heard wrote:
On Fri, 7 Jan 2005, Mark Ellison wrote:
Here's the suggested text (corrected):
- For conceptual rows used exclusively for defining objects
referenced by notification definitions:
- At least one non-auxiliary object must be defined with
a MAX-ACCESS of (at least) "accessible-for-notify"
I don't have an issue with including this text if the other MIB
Doctors agree. I don't think it says anything different from what
is in RFC 2578, but when running some test cases I did notice that
an old version of SMICng complained about "accessible-for-notify"
objects in tables:
E: f(xx.mi2), (2089,1) Row "xxxEntry" may not object with status of
"accessible-for-notify" defined under it
E: f(xx.mi2), (2122,1) Item "xxxNearFarFlag" has invalid value for
max-access
So maybe adding some text to cover this point is worhtwhile.
MIB Doctor comments, please.
I haven't heard any MIB Doctors speak up in favor of making this
change.
Based on that, I think I have to assume that we do not have
consensus to put it into the next spin of the document.
Mike
Thanks just the same.