Thanks, I have just one comment on one of the points, see below.
Dan
-----Original Message-----
From: Juergen Quittek [mailto:quittek at netlab.nec.de]
>> 4. Several DESCRIPTION clauses (e.g. midcomRuleAdminStatus,
>> midcomRuleStorageType) include SNMP-specific error messages when
>> describing the behavior of the object. This is OK, as the
MIDCOM-MIB
>> is designed to be used with SNMP as MIDCOM protocol, yet I would
>> include a note on this subject because this is not
customary within
>> other MIB documents which are written with a
protocol-independent orientation.
>>
> [suresh] I will leave to Juergen or Martin to comment on this.
We assume that you refer to error code 'inconsistentValue'
that we mention in several DESCRIPTION clauses.
We think this is still customary in recent MIB modules from
where we got the idea to use this error code. See, for
example, RFCs 4001, 4087, 4131, 4149, 4268, 4368, 4444, and 4546.
You are correct, however discussions between MIB Doctors recently led us
to the conclusion that it would be useful to make clear in texts of new
documents that errors like 'inconsistentValue' are specific to the usage
of the SMIv2 MIB module with SNMP, while if the MIB is used by other
protocols there probably would be similar errors under different names.
As I said, no special problem here, as SNMP is the MIDCOM protocol, but
a note like the following cannot harm.
'Note that this error code is SNMP specific. If the MIB module is used
with other protocols than SNMP, errors with similar semantics specific
to those protocols should be returned.'