[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [ippm] AD review: draft-ietf-ippm-storetraceroutes-03
Hi,
> Correct, so it should be:
>
> = If the user sets it, that value
> = If not, the default for the implementation
>
> This leaves one case: the implementation doesn't use that
> parameter. The idea of using an impossible value would work
> there as would "don't include it". In both cases, whoever
> uses the result, will have to check this.
Now the XML data model supports exactly what Henk writes.
To avoid confusion let me describe it better:
Configuration metadata:
If the user sets the parameter then it appears in the portion of the
XML file related to the configuration (Request element of type _Metadata),
otherwise the parameter will not appear there.
This is better than "impossible value", I personally think.
Measurement data:
in the portion of the XML file related to the measurement metadata
(MeasurementMetadata element of type _Metadata) it will appear the
actual value that the user set if the user set it, otherwise the default
for that particular implementation (that can not be enforced by the
XML file since there are no default common to all implementation, maybe
only the port traceroute use and if you want I can put this default number back,
anyway I removed all deafult enforcements from the XML schema).
Hope this clarifies the issue :-).
Cheers,
Saverio
============================================================
Dr. Saverio Niccolini
Senior Researcher
NEC Laboratories Europe, Network Research Division
Kurfuerstenanlage 36, D-69115 Heidelberg
Tel. +49 (0)6221 4342-118
Fax: +49 (0)6221 4342-155
e-mail: saverio.niccolini at nw.neclab.eu <-- !!! NEW ADDRESS !!!
============================================================
NEC Europe Limited Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria
Road, London W3 6BL Registered in England 2832014
_______________________________________________
ippm mailing list
ippm at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm