Subject: RE: [dhcwg] WG last call on draft-ietf-dhc-server-mib-08 (2nd las t call)

From: "Woundy, Richard" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Jul 2003 13:07:04 -0600

Ralph,

I concur with moving the DHCPv4 MIB forward, with the following two minor
comments.

1. If the editing opportunity arises, we should change the name of the
sequence "ServerRangeEntry" to "Dhcpv4ServerRangeEntry", per the suggested
naming conventions of Appendix E of
draft-ietf-ops-mib-review-guidelines-01.txt. Here is the corresponding MIB
compiler warning (which is not an error):

W: f(DHCP-SERVER-MIB.mi2), (922,9) Sequence "ServerRangeEntry" and Row
"dhcpv4ServerRangeEntry" should have related names

2. There are several accessible-for-notify objects that are not used in any
notifications:

dhcpv4ServerSharedNetReservedAddresses
dhcpv4ServerSharedNetTotalAddresses
dhcpv4ServerSubnetFreeAddrLowThreshold
dhcpv4ServerSubnetFreeAddrHighThreshold
dhcpv4ServerSubnetFreeAddresses

It is a little odd to define objects like these, but not strictly an error.

-- Rich

-----Original Message-----
From: Ralph Droms [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:30 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [dhcwg] WG last call on draft-ietf-dhc-server-mib-08 (2nd last
call)

The last call on draft-ietf-dhc-server-mib-08 will
end on Monday, July 7.
       --------------

- Ralph

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg

_______________________________________________
dhcwg mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dhcwg