RE: RADEXT WG Last Call on draft-ietf-radext-dynauth-client-mib-01.txt

["Nagi Reddy Jonnala \(njonnala\)" <njonnala@cisco.com>]

Dan,

Thanks for your review. Please see below a bit of history and answers to
your questions.

History:

Initially when we designed, we wanted to have conceptual grouping i.e.,
radiusDynamicAuthorization stemmed from radiusMIB (radiusMIB stems from
from mib-2 and the DAC & DAS MIBs under this root. 

After first MIB doctor's review:

As I understand, MIB doctor suggested to change the MIBs to directly
originate from mib-2(instead from radiusMIB). That's how
radiusDynamicAuthorization took origin from mib-2.

I'm not sure how the warning was not noticed. As I mentioned, the reason
to keep like this way is to have a conceptual grouping. Though DAC & DAS
MIBs could be directly orginated from mib-2 if it is mandatory.

regards
Nagi.



-----Original Message-----
From: owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org]
On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 4:38 PM
To: Bernard Aboba; radiusext@ops.ietf.org
Cc: Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
Subject: RE: RADEXT WG Last Call on
draft-ietf-radext-dynauth-client-mib-01.txt

Both draft-ietf-radext-dynauth-client-mib-01.txt and
draft-ietf-radext-dynauth-server-mib-01.txt define
radiusDynamicAuthorization as 

radiusDynamicAuthorization    OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mib-2 xxx } 

And then define the respective MODULE-IDENTITY under
radiusDynamicAuthorization. 

Defining the same node in two separate documents seems odd, although it
is IANA who is in charge with the xxx allocation. Also, this results in
smilint protesting with a level 4 warning:

Warning:     module-identity-registration (level 4)
Message:     uncontrolled MODULE-IDENTITY registration
Description: The identities of IETF MIB modules should be registered
below
             mib-2, transmission, or snmpModules so that the
registration
             space can be controlled by IANA.

I wonder what are the good reasons to break this 'should'
recommendation. 

Regards,

Dan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> [mailto:owner-radiusext@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bernard Aboba
> Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2005 5:02 PM
> To: radiusext@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RADEXT WG Last Call on
> draft-ietf-radext-dynauth-client-mib-01.txt
> 
> This is an announcement of RADEXT WG last call on the "Dynamic 
> Authorization Client MIB", prior to sending this document to the IESG 
> for publication as an Informational RFC.
>  The document will be available on the IETF archive at the following 
> location:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-radext-dynauth-
> client-mib-01.txt
> 
> Until then, it is available for inspection at:
> http://www.drizzle.com/~aboba/RADEXT/draft-ietf-radext-dynauth
> -client-mib-01.txt
> 
> RADEXT WG Last Call will last until July 28, 2005.  Please send your 
> comments to the RADEXT WG mailing list
> (radiusext@ops.ietf.org) in the format described in the RADEXT Issues 
> List, located at:
> 
> http://www.drizzle.com/~aboba/RADEXT/
> 
> --
> 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/>
> 

--
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/>

--
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/>