RE: errors in draft-ietf-te-mib-12.txt

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

> >sorry for bothering you again. But during the implementation 
> >of the MPLS MIBs I came across some more inconsistencies...
> >
> >1) concerning data types: mplsTunnelIndex is of syntax mplsTunnelIndex, 
> >derived from UNSIGNED32. But the corresponding scalar mplsTunnelIndexNext is 
> >of type IndexIntegerNextFree, derived from INTEGER32. I don't 
> >think it is a good idea to have different data types for these two.
> 
I have stated before: the above is INCORRECT. The IndexIntegerNextFree
is Unsigned32 with a range of 0-4B.

> 	It was recommended that we used IndexIntegerNextFree
> as the basis for this object. I have constrained the 
> values to being only positive and 0 to conincide with
> the mplsTunnelIndex value and 0 as defined in the indexNext
> object:
> 
> mplsTunnelIndexNext OBJECT-TYPE
>    SYNTAX        IndexIntegerNextFree (0..65535)
>    MAX-ACCESS    read-only
>    STATUS        current
>    DESCRIPTION  
>        "This object contains an unused value for
>         mplsTunnelIndex, or a zero to indicate
>         that none exist. Negative values are not allowed,
>         as they do not correspond to valid values of
>         mplsTunnelIndex.
>  
>         Note that this object offers an unused value
>         for an mplsTunnelIndex value at the ingress 
>         side of a tunnel. At other LSRs the value
>         of mplsTunnelIndex SHOULD be taken from the
>         value signaled by the MPLS signaling protocol.
>        "
>    ::= { mplsTeObjects 1 }
> 
Looks good to me!

Bert