Definitions of Textual Conventions (TCs) for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Management
draft-ietf-bfd-tc-mib-08
Yes
(Adrian Farrel)
No Objection
(Alissa Cooper)
(Barry Leiba)
(Brian Haberman)
(Jari Arkko)
(Kathleen Moriarty)
(Martin Stiemerling)
(Richard Barnes)
(Spencer Dawkins)
(Stephen Farrell)
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 07 and is now closed.
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(for -07)
Unknown
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
Yes
Yes
(2014-05-27)
Unknown
The description for BfdCtrlSourcePortNumberTC lacks what the port is expected to be though leaving the range open is described the same as for the BfdCtrlDestPortNumberTC. This looks like a bit of copy-and-paste. I'd assume that the source port can be anything in the range referenced (i.e. "Port 49152..65535 from RFC5881") and the description text should be clarified/updated.
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2014-05-28)
Unknown
Not really a blocking factor (DISCUSS), but it would nice if the situation would be clarified. As mentioned by Bert Wijnen, part of the MIB doctors review: BfdIntervalTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The BFD interval in microseconds." SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..4294967295) If you see it used in, for example bfdSessDesiredMinTxInterval OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX BfdIntervalTC MAX-ACCESS read-create STATUS current DESCRIPTION "This object specifies the minimum interval, in microseconds, that the local system would like to use when transmitting BFD Control packets. The value of zero(0) is reserved in this case, and should not be used." REFERENCE "Section 4.1 from Katz, D. and D. Ward, Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), RFC 5880, June 2012." ::= { bfdSessEntry 25 } Then what value is added by using a TC. In fact you can even question if it is not conflicting, because according to the TC description clause I would expect zero to be a valid interval value, where as here it describes that zero is a special value and should not be used. So it is only special Since it should NOT BE used, or does zero mean something special? Assuming zero SHOULD NOT be used. I personally would just do: bfdSessDesiredMinTxInterval OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX Unsigned32 (1..4294967295) MAX-ACCESS read-create STATUS current UNITS microseconds DESCRIPTION "This object specifies the minimum interval that the local system would like to use when transmitting BFD Control packets. REFERENCE "Section 4.1 from Katz, D. and D. Ward, Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), RFC 5880, June 2012." ::= { bfdSessEntry 25 } BENOIT: the alternative is to have the following TC and to simplify the defintion BfdIntervalTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The BFD interval in microseconds." SYNTAX Unsigned32 (1..4294967295) In case zero has special meaning I would do: bfdSessDesiredMinTxInterval OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0 | 1..4294967295) MAX-ACCESS read-create STATUS current UNITS microseconds DESCRIPTION "This object specifies the minimum interval that the local system would like to use when transmitting BFD Control packets. The value zero has been reserved for a special meaning: <describe what zero means> REFERENCE "Section 4.1 from Katz, D. and D. Ward, Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), RFC 5880, June 2012." ::= { bfdSessEntry 25 }
Brian Haberman Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Joel Jaeggli Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
(2014-05-24)
Unknown
looks like mib doctors et al have no discussion going on that will result in changes.
Kathleen Moriarty Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Martin Stiemerling Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Richard Barnes Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection
()
Unknown