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

Re: [MIB2RDML] Expressing SNMP SMI Datatypes in XML Schema Definition Language -03 draft submitted



Hi Bob,

I have reviewed the -03 draft and have the following comments:
 
- In section 5.1, "Numeric Datatypes", last paragraph:  I think it reasonable to also include the Counter64 datatype as having "...special application semantics that must be considered..." since Counter32 and Counter64 can both wrap and suffer discontinuities.  Possibly, TimeTicks should also be mentioned as having special application semantics (due to the 'epoch' concept).  Is Gauge32 mentioned due to the 'latching' concept?

- In section 5.2, "OctetString", second paragraph says "each octet is encoded as two hexadecimal digits" and the third bullet indicates the "maxLength" restriction of 65535 octets.  However, the xs:simpleType "OctetString" definition in section 4 indicates an xs:maxLength value="65535".  If the intent is to represent 65535 octets then the xs:maxLength value should be twice this number, "131070".

- [more of a personal wish] In section 5.5, "ObjectIdentifier", I realize the text is written to be faithful to the definition of the SMI OBJECT IDENTIFIER.  In this regard, it is probably not appropriate to place support for "OID fragments" here.  I find I use a lot of OID fragments (1 or more subids that do not have the initial 2 subid restrictions) to represent instance components for a set of related OBJECT-TYPE OIDs.  Possibly there is a place, either in this memo, or in another related memo to support the notion of an OID fragment?  I suppose I could use the ObjectIdentifier "as is" by prepending any fragment with 1.1, but I regard this as a programmatic contortion with undesirable overhead.

Thanks for considering these two comments and one wish!

Mark

-- 
Mark Ellison                        Ellison Software Consulting, Inc.
tel: +1 (603) 362-9270              38 Salem Road
web: http://EllisonSoftware.com     Atkinson, NH  03811, USA

On 07/28/2008 01:13 AM, Natale, Bob wrote:

Hi,

 

I have submitted an updated version (-03) of “Expressing SNMP SMI Datatypes in XML Schema Definition Language”, via the Internet-Drafts submission tool, but it will likely not get processed until following IETF-72.

 

In the meantime, interested parties can download a copy from:

http://home.comcast.net/~bobnatale/draft-ietf-opsawg-smi-datatypes-in-xsd-03.txt

 

The -03 version has some minor fix-ups (documented in the change log) and is being submitted now because the -02 version (which was posted ahead of the IETF-72 cut-off time) got dropped as a result of an (on-going) technical problem with the tool (apparently).

 

I hope that this version may be ready for WG last call.  I will not be in Dublin, however – but will try to participate remotely if possible if this topic is discussed in the OPSAWG session there.

 

If anything is a hang-up, I suspect it will be in the XML registration section (“IANA Considerations”).

 

Please let me know your observations, etc.

 

[I’ve included a couple of the NETCONF-related lists as bcc: addressees on this, since several recent threads on those lists have mentioned the XSDMI work.  Further discussion about this draft, however, should be on the OPSAWG list.]

 

Cheers,

BobN

 

From: Natale, Bob
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2008 7:17 PM
To: opsawg at ietf.org
Cc: mib2rdml at ietf.org
Subject: Expressing SNMP SMI Datatypes in XML Schema Definition Language -02 draft submitted

 

Hi,

 

I have submitted an updated version of "Expressing SNMP SMI Datatypes in XML Schema Definition Language", draft-ietf-opsawg-smi-datatypes-in-xsd-02.txt, via the Internet-Drafts submission tool ahead of today’s deadline, but had to do it via a "manual entry" due to administrative complications (once again!), which imposes some delays in the formal announcement process.

 

Pending formal publication, you can get a copy from the "staging" area at: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/staging/draft-ietf-opsawg-smi-datatypes-in-xsd-02.txt.  If that presents any problems for you, please let me know and I will forward you a copy directly.

 

This draft includes changes made for comments on the -01 version received from Mark Ellison, Juergen Schoenwaelder, and David Harrington, and some other fix-ups noted in the Change Log section.

 

I hope that this version may be ready for WG last call.  I will not be in Dublin, however – but will try to participate remotely if possible if this topic is discussed in the OPSAWG session there.

 

If anything is a hang-up, I suspect it will be in the XML registration section (“IANA Considerations”).

 

Please let me know your observations, etc.

 

Cheers,

BobN

 


_______________________________________________ MIB2RDML mailing list MIB2RDML at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib2rdml

_______________________________________________
MIB2RDML mailing list
MIB2RDML at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib2rdml