Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-imss-fc-rtm-mib-03.txt

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 17:51:10 -0500

I was selected as General Area Review Team reviewer for this specification
(for background on Gen-ART, please see
http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html).

Summary: This document is almost ready for publication as a Proposed 
Standard. I do have a question on Section 5.3, listed below.

I also identified two editorial comments (not part of the Gen-ART review for 
Brian). I hope this is useful.

Thanks,

1.  Introduction

   This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
   for use with network management protocols in the Internet community.
   In particular, it describes managed objects for information related
   to the Fibre Channel network's Routing Table for routing within a
   Fabric.  Managed objects specific to particular routing protocols,
   such as FSPF, are not specified in this MIB module.

Spencer (NIT): FSPF is not exanded until later in the document (and should 
have the reference to [FC-SW-4] that doesn't appear until Section 4). 
Suggest "... such as Fabric Shortest Path First (FSPF) protocol [FC-SW-4], 
..." as replacement text.

5.3.  Fabric Index

   The latest standard for an interconnecting Fabric containing multiple
   Fabric Switch elements is [FC-SW-4] (which replaces the previous
   revision [FC-SW-3]).  [FC-SW-4] specifies the operation of both a
   single Fabric in a physical infrastructure, as well as the support of
   multiple Virtual Fabrics operating within one (or more) physical
   infrastructures.  Whether operating on a physical Fabric (i.e.,
   without Virtual Fabrics) or within a Virtual Fabric, the operation of
   FSPF within a Fabric is identical.  Therefore, this MIB defines all
   Fabric-related information in tables which are INDEX-ed by an
   arbitrary integer, named a "Fabric Index", the syntax of which is
   IMPORTed from the T11-TC-MIB.  When a device is connected to a single
   physical Fabric, without use of any virtual Fabrics, the value of
   this Fabric Index will always be 1.  In an environment of multiple
   virtual and/or physical Fabrics, this index provides a means to
   distinguish one Fabric from another.

Spencer: I can guess what a Virtual Fabric is, but I'm guessing and the term 
hasn't been introduced yet, and there's no reference for it. Not a critical 
problem, but since there's a nice overview in Section 3, maybe it could have 
a sentence or two that introduces the concept, before it appears in Section 
5.3?

5.5.  The t11FcRouteTable's INDEX

   Providing the same useful feature in the MIB in this document,
   results in having an unusually large number (ten) of objects in the
   t11FcRouteTable's INDEX clause.  However, all ten are either integers
   or strings of length 0 or 3 octets.  Thus, the aggregate number of
   sub-identifiers to be appended to an OBJECT-TYPE's OID when naming an
   instance of an object in this table, is at most 22 sub-identifiers,
   i.e., less than the *minimum* number to be appended for the
   inetCidrRouteTable table.  In other words, while ten is an unusually
   large number of objects in an INDEX clause, the resultant OIDs are
   not unusually large.

Spencer (more than a NIT): This paragraph is really tortured, until you get 
to the last sentence, which seems all that's needed anyway (suggest "While 
this useful feature results in an unusually large number (ten) of objects in 
the t11FcRouteTable's INDEX clause, all ten are all ten are either integers 
or strings of length 0 or 3 octets, so the resulting OIDs are not unusually 
large."). But the reason I flagged this as "more than a nit" was that 
"length 0 or 3 octets" was confusing - the point is, "maximum length of 3 
octets", isn't it? FC people are very aware of FCAddressIdentifier 
structure, but no one else is, so "0 or 3 octets" is a distraction, and the 
wordy paragraph just made it worse. 

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

---

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 20:27:30 -0500

("Snort!") I was re-reading my own review tonight and saw

> Spencer (more than a NIT): This paragraph is really tortured, until you 
> get to the last sentence, which seems all that's needed anyway (suggest 
> "While this useful feature results in an unusually large number (ten) of 
> objects in the t11FcRouteTable's INDEX clause, all ten are all ten are 
> either integers

s/all ten are all ten are/all ten are/

"Writing error-free text is hard" :-(

Thanks,

Spencer