From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Wed Aug 7 03:53:02 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA08975 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 03:53:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id DAA25013 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 03:54:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA24996; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 03:54:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA24969 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 03:54:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from columba.www.eur.3com.com (ip-161-71-171-238.corp-eur.3com.com [161.71.171.238]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id DAA08971 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 03:52:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from toucana.eur.3com.com (toucana.EUR.3Com.COM [140.204.220.50]) by columba.www.eur.3com.com with ESMTP id g777thRG017847; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:55:44 +0100 (BST) Received: from notesmta.eur.3com.com (eurmta1.EUR.3Com.COM [140.204.220.206]) by toucana.eur.3com.com with SMTP id g777sdR04440; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:54:39 +0100 (BST) Received: by notesmta.eur.3com.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.3 (733.2 10-16-1998)) id 80256C0E.002BD5BB ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:58:47 +0100 X-Lotus-FromDomain: 3COM From: "Les Bell" To: Michael MacFaden cc: bridge-mib@ietf.org, bwijnen@lucent.com, randy@psg.com, kzm@cisco.com, ah_smith@pacbell.net Message-ID: <80256C0E.002BD3FA.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:47:20 +0100 Subject: Re: [Bridge-mib] IETF-54 meeting Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org Mike, thanks for your comments on draft-ietf-bridge-bridgemib-smiv2-03.txt. I shall try to respond to your first issue on dot1dStpPortEnable. > 1) dot1dStpPortEnable > I believe there needs to be some text added to the front matter > to describe the relationship between ifAdminStatus and dot1dStpPortEnable. > What is the relationship between ifAdminStatus and dot1dStpPortEnable? > a) none, > b) represent same value (as embodied in cisco catalyst implementation) > c) represent different layers (port level, vs protocol level) (kzm expectation?) > > background info: http://www.macfaden.com/ietf/bridge-test-results.txt When you raised this before, there did not seem to be a consenus for a definition that would satisfy everyone. One of the original authors of RFC1493, Anil Rijsinghani, indicated that c) was the correct answer, but did not elaborate on how this affects things like handling of STP BPDUs, or forwarding of traffic. My own interpretation is as follows: If dot1dStpPortEnable is set to enabled(1) the port should participate normally in Spanning Tree and in forwarding traffic. If dot1dStpPortEnable is set to disabled(2) the port should not participate in Spanning Tree, received BPDUs should be discarded, and the port should not participate in Layer 2 forwarding of traffic, although it may participate in Layer 3 forwarding. I think we all agree on the interpretation of enabled(1), but your test results show that disabled(2) has been interpreted differently by each vendor. This highlights the need for clarification, as you said. So I am offering the above interpretation as a suggested resolution, to be added to the DESCRIPTION of dot1dStpPortEnable. I would like to hear the views of the group, to see if they agree or disagree with this interpretation. I would particularly like to hear the views of the original authors of RFC1493. Les... _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Wed Aug 7 04:00:35 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA09100 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 04:00:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id EAA25753 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 04:01:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA25747; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 04:01:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id EAA25708 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 04:01:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from columba.www.eur.3com.com (ip-161-71-171-238.corp-eur.3com.com [161.71.171.238]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA09097 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 04:00:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from toucana.eur.3com.com (toucana.EUR.3Com.COM [140.204.220.50]) by columba.www.eur.3com.com with ESMTP id g7783LRG018269; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 09:03:21 +0100 (BST) Received: from notesmta.eur.3com.com (eurmta1.EUR.3Com.COM [140.204.220.206]) by toucana.eur.3com.com with SMTP id g7782JR05010; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 09:02:19 +0100 (BST) Received: by notesmta.eur.3com.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.3 (733.2 10-16-1998)) id 80256C0E.002C8996 ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 09:06:28 +0100 X-Lotus-FromDomain: 3COM From: "Les Bell" To: Michael MacFaden cc: bridge-mib@ietf.org, bwijnen@lucent.com, randy@psg.com, kzm@cisco.com, ah_smith@pacbell.net Message-ID: <80256C0E.002C8935.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:55:03 +0100 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [Bridge-mib] dot1dStpPortPriority Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org Mike, in response to you second issue... > 2) dot1dStpPortPriority > The wording could be more specific as to what the issue is. > It currently reads: > > "The value of the priority field which is contained in > the first (in network byte order) octet of the (2 octet long) Port ID. > The other octet of the Port ID is given by the value of > dot1dStpPort. On newer bridges, permissible values are 0-240, in > steps of 16." > > I don't believe this change is backward compatible at all. You can't > simply change the values one can use. This entirely new semantic requires > a new object. I simply can't see IESG MIB module reviewers accepting > this a change. And exactly what is a "newer bridge" anyway? The IEEE 802.1 WG chose the new implementation of the Port Priority to allow it to be backward compatible with the currently deployed implementations, with the intention that existing SNMP applications could still use the same object to manage it. The caveat is that, in a new agent implementation, i.e. an agent that implements 802.1t/802.1w , some values may be rejected with a "bad value" error, if it cannot accept the value given. Perhaps one way to address this issue is to leave the DESCRIPTION of dot1dStpPortPriority unchanged from RFC1493 and to define the more limited set of values in a conformance clause for agents that support 802.1t/802.w. Les... _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Wed Aug 7 08:05:48 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA14239 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:05:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id IAA06829 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:07:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA06817; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:07:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id IAA06786 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:06:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from columba.www.eur.3com.com (ip-161-71-171-238.corp-eur.3com.com [161.71.171.238]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA14234 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 08:05:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from toucana.eur.3com.com (toucana.EUR.3Com.COM [140.204.220.50]) by columba.www.eur.3com.com with ESMTP id g77C8NRG002749; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:08:28 +0100 (BST) Received: from notesmta.eur.3com.com (eurmta1.EUR.3Com.COM [140.204.220.206]) by toucana.eur.3com.com with SMTP id g77C7JR24891; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:07:20 +0100 (BST) Received: by notesmta.eur.3com.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.3 (733.2 10-16-1998)) id 80256C0E.0042FAF0 ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:11:36 +0100 X-Lotus-FromDomain: 3COM From: "Les Bell" To: "Ilan Yerushalmi" cc: bridge-mib@ietf.org Message-ID: <80256C0E.0042F958.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:00:08 +0100 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [Bridge-mib] Re: RowStatus in draft-ietf-bridge-ext-v2-00 Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org I think you are right. We need to add a RowStatus variable to each of these tables. Les... "Ilan Yerushalmi" on 07/08/2002 09:44:21 Sent by: "Ilan Yerushalmi" To: Les Bell/GB/3Com cc: Subject: RowStatus in draft-ietf-bridge-ext-v2-00 Hi, I have a question regarding draft-ietf-bridge-ext-v2-00: Isn't RowStatus variable is missing in dot1vProtocolGroupTable and dot1vProtocolPortTable Tables? If not, how can I delete an entry in those tables? Thank you, Ilan _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Wed Aug 7 13:07:15 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA28998 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:07:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id NAA24468 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:08:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA24458; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:08:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA24424 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:08:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from agile.yagosys.com (host60.riverstonenet.com [64.95.122.60] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA28939 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:07:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 1963 invoked by uid 10041); 7 Aug 2002 17:07:47 -0000 Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 10:07:47 -0700 From: Michael MacFaden To: Les Bell Cc: bridge-mib@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Bridge-mib] IETF-54 meeting Message-ID: <20020807170747.GA1897@riverstonenet.com> References: <80256C0E.002BD3FA.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <80256C0E.002BD3FA.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Operating-System: GNU/Linux 2.4.18 Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 08:47:20AM +0100, Les Bell wrote: >Mike, thanks for your comments on draft-ietf-bridge-bridgemib-smiv2-03.txt. I >shall try to respond to your first issue on dot1dStpPortEnable. [snip] >My own interpretation is as follows: > > If dot1dStpPortEnable is set to enabled(1) the port should participate > normally in Spanning Tree and in forwarding traffic. > > If dot1dStpPortEnable is set to disabled(2) the port should not > participate in Spanning Tree, received BPDUs should be discarded, and > the port should not participate in Layer 2 forwarding of traffic, > although it may participate in Layer 3 forwarding. > >I would like to hear the views of the group, to see if they agree or disagree >with this interpretation. I would particularly like to hear the views of the >original authors of RFC1493. I agree and believe this 'clarifying' text resolve the existing incompatiblities between vendor implementations. Thank you, Mike MacFaden _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Wed Aug 7 13:55:38 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA01283 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:55:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id NAA26604 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:56:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA26592; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:56:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA26561 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:56:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from agile.yagosys.com (host60.riverstonenet.com [64.95.122.60] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA01280 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 13:55:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 2385 invoked by uid 10041); 7 Aug 2002 17:56:17 -0000 Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 10:56:17 -0700 From: Michael MacFaden To: Les Bell Cc: bridge-mib@ietf.org Message-ID: <20020807175617.GB1897@riverstonenet.com> References: <80256C0E.002C8935.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <80256C0E.002C8935.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Operating-System: GNU/Linux 2.4.18 Subject: [Bridge-mib] Re: dot1dStpPortPriority Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 08:55:03AM +0100, Les Bell wrote: >> 2) dot1dStpPortPriority >> The wording could be more specific as to what the issue is. >> It currently reads: >> >> "The value of the priority field which is contained in >> the first (in network byte order) octet of the (2 octet long) Port ID. >> The other octet of the Port ID is given by the value of >> dot1dStpPort. On newer bridges, permissible values are 0-240, in >> steps of 16." >> >> I don't believe this change is backward compatible at all. You can't >> simply change the values one can use. This entirely new semantic requires >> a new object. I simply can't see IESG MIB module reviewers accepting >> this a change. And exactly what is a "newer bridge" anyway? > >The IEEE 802.1 WG chose the new implementation of the Port Priority to allow it >to be backward compatible with the currently deployed implementations, with the >intention that existing SNMP applications could still use the same object to >manage it. The caveat is that, in a new agent implementation, i.e. an agent >that implements 802.1t/802.1w , some values may be rejected with a "bad value" >error, if it cannot accept the value given. > >Perhaps one way to address this issue is to leave the DESCRIPTION of >dot1dStpPortPriority unchanged from RFC1493 and to define the more limited set >of values in a conformance clause for agents that support 802.1t/802.w. I still feel the correct "SNMP" solution is to create a new object and deprecate the old. However this approach may be acceptable if everyone thinks the following impact would be reasonable on the operator community. Test: for (i = 0; i <= 255; i++) set dot1dStpPortPriority.X = i; Expected Results: Device mode | Mgmt App | result 802.1D 802.1D ok 802.1D 802.1t/w ok (new apps can know the semantic changes) 802.1t/w 802.1D bad value returned for values 241-255 This appears surprising and I am not sure exactly how inocuous the impact would be using an old 802.1D app against 802.1t/w bridges. I would support a semantic change to dot1dStpPortPriority.X if we had had the convention of using capabilities bits as found in rfc2674 / dot1dDeviceCapabilities such that a 1493 based app whould query a specific bit to know exactly what mode the bridge was in before performing any such set operation. Regards, Mike _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From daemon@optimus.ietf.org Wed Aug 7 18:50:15 2002 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA12614 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:50:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id SAA13223 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:51:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from optimus.ietf.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA13210; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:51:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin [132.151.1.176]) by optimus.ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA13179 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:51:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from agile.yagosys.com (host60.riverstonenet.com [64.95.122.60] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id SAA12611 for ; Wed, 7 Aug 2002 18:50:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: (qmail 8464 invoked by uid 10041); 7 Aug 2002 22:50:52 -0000 Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 15:50:52 -0700 From: Michael MacFaden To: bridge-mib@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Bridge-mib] Re: dot1dStpPortPriority Message-ID: <20020807225052.GI1897@riverstonenet.com> References: <80256C0E.002C8935.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> <20020807175617.GB1897@riverstonenet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020807175617.GB1897@riverstonenet.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-Operating-System: GNU/Linux 2.4.18 Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-Id: X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org On Wed, Aug 07, 2002 at 10:56:17AM -0700, Michael MacFaden wrote: >Test: > >for (i = 0; i <= 255; i++) > set dot1dStpPortPriority.X = i; > >Expected Results: > >Device mode | Mgmt App | result >802.1D 802.1D ok >802.1D 802.1t/w ok (new apps can know the semantic changes) >802.1t/w 802.1D bad value returned for values 241-255 > >This appears surprising and I am not sure exactly how inocuous >the impact would be using an old 802.1D app against 802.1t/w bridges. > >I would support a semantic change to dot1dStpPortPriority.X if we >had had the convention of using capabilities bits as found in >rfc2674 / dot1dDeviceCapabilities such that a >1493 based app would query a specific bit to know exactly what mode >the bridge was in before performing any such set operation. Bert Wjinen pointed out the draft text says '..in steps of 16' so the range for bad values would actually include more than the listing I presented above. Mike _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From nobody@virtual.auracom.net Sat Aug 10 20:42:21 2002 Received: from sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com (sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com [171.71.163.54]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA21667 for ; Sat, 10 Aug 2002 20:42:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sj-msg-av-2.cisco.com (sj-msg-av-2.cisco.com [171.69.24.12]) by sj-msg-core-4.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g7B0686I006191 for ; Sat, 10 Aug 2002 17:06:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from proxy3.cisco.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sj-msg-av-2.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g7B04mgT008478 for ; Sat, 10 Aug 2002 17:04:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from virtual.auracom.net (nobody@virtual.auracom.net [165.154.140.44]) by proxy3.cisco.com (8.12.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id g7B04oQm029548 for ; Sat, 10 Aug 2002 17:04:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by virtual.auracom.net (8.9.0/8.9.0) id TAA14452; Sat, 10 Aug 2002 19:56:53 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2002 19:56:53 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200208102356.TAA14452@virtual.auracom.net> To: kdubray@ironbridgenetworks.com, bmwg@ironbridgenetworks.com, bmwg-request@ironbridgenetworks.com, bridge-mib@external.cisco.com, bridge-mib-request@cisco.com, liman@sunet.se, saperia@idscons.com, rfrye@longsys.com, rdietz@hifn.com, evi@caida.org From: spock@startrek.com () Subject: WaTcH mE oN mY wEbCaM FrEe Below is the result of your feedback form. It was submitted by (spock@startrek.com) on Saturday, August 10, 2002 at 19:56:53 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- message: Hi, My name is Lindsay Hamilton, and I'd like you to really check out my site - http://zor.org/lindsaysplayhouse - First Let me start off by telling you a little about myself, and then if you're interested, you may continue to my site and then to my web cam page if im online! - click here -> http://zor.org/lindsaysplayhouse - about my self: 18 / f / 4'11 - 89lbs ---------------------------------------------------------------------------