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

Re: Item 1) Re: AD review of: draft-ietf-snmpconf-diffpolicy-06.t xt




On Tuesday, July 29, 2003, at 09:07 PM, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:

> Harry, you were involved (as one of the MIB doctors) when we
> crteated the mib-guidelines. The below are all as a result of
> what we as collective set of MIB doctors thought to be good.
> One of my reasons to get the mib-guidelines was so that it
> can be used by MIB doctors during their review, and so that
> we get a CONSISTENT (or as consistent as possible) review
> for all MIB documents, and not a review that is heavily biased
> based on which MIB Doctor does the actual review.

I agree fully on adding the compliance statement,
but I merely wanted to point out the errors that
SMICng gave. The errors did not seem errors to me and
neither did libsmi seen them as such.
While looking at it, do we not need to add this in the
guidelines?? I mean, whether the import of an object, group
is needed in the compliance statement. But that is not a
discussion for SNMPCONF, IMHO.

> W.r.t. the IMPORT thing.... it is a MAY, but most MIB docotrs
> prefer the explicit IMPORT. It makes it clearer for everyone.
>
> Now..... as I indicated, it seems that you do not need to
> IMPORT any of those things for the MODULE-COMPLIACE. You can
> just mention (in the DESCRIPTION clause) that one needs to
> implement DIFFSERV-MIB according to diffServMIBFullCompliance.
>
> Hope this explains

Yes, that is what I understood and have done.
Sorry, I believe I was not clear the first time.

regards,
Harrie