Multiprotocol Label Switching (mpls)

Joan Cucchiara | 4 Jun 2012 08:17

MIB Dr. Review: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib-03.txt


Hello,

This document is clearly written and the examples are great!  Thanks for 
that!

Review is divided into sections.  General Comments are followed by specific 
sections.
The MIB Modules were compiled by smiLint and results are in each MIB 
Modules'
section.   There are some warnings, but think these should be fixed.

My major concern is contained in the General Comments section below.

Thanks,
  -Joan

General Comments
-----------------

Major concern:

I would like to express that I can see why the MIB Modules
are designed as they are.  Namely, so mplsTunnelTable (in rfc3812)
can be used for MPLS-TP Tunnels also.  I do see there is likely to
be value in doing that.  However, my concern is that
the semantic definition of two indices for mplsTunnelTable
(mplsTunnelIngressLSRId,  mplsTunnelEgressLSRId)
are being semantically redefined in the MPLS-TE-EXT-STD-MIB, and this
breaks the rules of the SMI and there is a chance that legacy

(Continue reading)

headers

Sam Aldrin | 13 Jun 2012 06:01

Re: MIB Dr. Review: draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib-03.txt

Hi Joan,

Thank you for the detailed review. Appreciate that very much.
Please find my comments inline with %sam.

-sam
On Jun 3, 2012, at 11:17 PM, Joan Cucchiara wrote:

> 
> Hello,
> 
> This document is clearly written and the examples are great!  Thanks for that!
> 
> Review is divided into sections.  General Comments are followed by specific sections.
> The MIB Modules were compiled by smiLint and results are in each MIB Modules'
> section.   There are some warnings, but think these should be fixed.
> 
> My major concern is contained in the General Comments section below.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Joan
> 
> 
> General Comments
> -----------------
> 
> Major concern:
> 
> I would like to express that I can see why the MIB Modules
> are designed as they are.  Namely, so mplsTunnelTable (in rfc3812)

(Continue reading)