From randy_presuhn@mindspring.com Wed Nov 13 20:00:00 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: disman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: disman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89B0E21E8157 for ; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:00:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.359 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.359 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.241, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Be8EusuK7Vs3 for ; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:59:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.68]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32F1B21E8091 for ; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:59:54 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=YZx9O3OBHCQydDGGic/ktS9UOP4Ue0jsf63VA1xJkkitD8M2Qtabs27kg3VswySy; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [209.86.224.39] (helo=elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net) by elasmtp-masked.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Vgo5t-0003BV-Ur; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 22:59:49 -0500 Received: from 76.254.52.46 by webmail.earthlink.net with HTTP; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 22:59:49 -0500 Message-ID: <30428339.1384401589933.JavaMail.root@elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 19:59:49 -0800 (GMT-08:00) From: Randy Presuhn To: RFC Errata System , ramk@cisco.com, bclaise@cisco.com, joelja@bogus.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d8889e105617274a0edb24c298fc04e009c5cd87366bd75b6e01350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.39 Cc: 8500302@qq.com, disman@ietf.org, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Subject: Re: [Disman] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2981 (3798) X-BeenThere: disman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Randy Presuhn List-Id: Distributed Management List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 04:00:00 -0000 Hi - I think the existing text is correct, and that the proposed erratum should be rejected. The existing text effectively says that if neither the boolean(1) bit nor the threshold(2) bit of mteTriggerTest is set, then the value assigned to mteTriggerSampleType doesn't matter. This is indeed how it is intended to function. Of course, I invite others to examine the proposed erratum. Randy -----Original Message----- >From: RFC Errata System >Sent: Nov 13, 2013 2:09 AM >To: ramk@cisco.com, bclaise@cisco.com, joelja@bogus.com, randy_presuhn@mindspring.com >Cc: 8500302@qq.com, rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org >Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2981 (3798) > >The following errata report has been submitted for RFC2981, >"Event MIB". > >-------------------------------------- >You may review the report below and at: >http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=2981&eid=3798 > >-------------------------------------- >Type: Technical >Reported by: shuaixiaojuan <8500302@qq.com> > >Section: 7 > >Original Text >------------- >mteTriggerSampleType's description: >If only 'existence' is set in mteTriggerTest this object has >no meaning." > > >Corrected Text >-------------- >If no 'boolean' is set in mteTriggerTest this object has >no meaning." > > >Notes >----- >mteTriggerThresholdDeltaRising was added to mteTriggerThresholdTable from the version draft-ietf-disman-event-mib-09.txt and mteTriggerThresholdTable can both deal 'absoluteValue' and 'deltaValue', so mteTriggerSampleType has mean for 'boolean' only. (mteTriggerSampleType has no changed from draft-ietf-disman-event-mib-06.txt) > > was added to > >Instructions: >------------- >This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please >use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or >rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party (IESG) >can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary. > >-------------------------------------- >RFC2981 (draft-ietf-disman-event-mib-10) >-------------------------------------- >Title : Event MIB >Publication Date : October 2000 >Author(s) : R. Kavasseri, Ed. >Category : PROPOSED STANDARD >Source : Distributed Management >Area : Operations and Management >Stream : IETF >Verifying Party : IESG From randy_presuhn@mindspring.com Thu Nov 14 08:56:23 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: disman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: disman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18E4411E8100 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:56:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.381 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.381 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.766, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SARE_SUB_ENC_UTF8=0.152, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QJ5XcyCZAD4a for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:56:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.63]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C977111E80E3 for ; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:56:16 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=dTxGNHJfbYXPOJ+Gk35IEc6P7gmCYNurDGhBEdW10kCqQqTDwfLDzSZG6ZMbJ7V/; h=Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:To:Subject:Cc:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [209.86.224.32] (helo=elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net) by elasmtp-junco.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1Vh0DC-000074-Dc; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 11:56:10 -0500 Received: from 76.254.52.46 by webmail.earthlink.net with HTTP; Thu, 14 Nov 2013 11:56:09 -0500 Message-ID: <20780676.1384448170260.JavaMail.root@elwamui-cypress.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 08:56:09 -0800 (GMT-08:00) From: Randy Presuhn To: =?UTF-8?B?5biF5biF?= <8500302@qq.com>, RFC Errata System , "ramk@cisco.com" , "bclaise@cisco.com" , "joelja@bogus.com" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d8889e105617274a0edb775d27ef3a60ebab89c8eff05d07b6d5350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 209.86.224.32 Cc: "disman@ietf.org" , "rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org" Subject: Re: [Disman] =?utf-8?b?562U5aSNOiBbVGVjaG5pY2FsIEVycmF0YSBSZXBvcnRl?= =?utf-8?q?d=5D_RFC2981_=283798=29?= X-BeenThere: disman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Randy Presuhn List-Id: Distributed Management List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 16:56:23 -0000 Hi - >From: =E5=B8=85=E5=B8=85 <8500302@qq.com> >Sent: Nov 14, 2013 1:55 AM >To: Randy Presuhn , RFC Errata System , "ramk@cisco.com" , "bclaise@cisco.co= m" , "joelja@bogus.com" >Cc: "rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org" , "disman@ietf.= org" >Subject: =E7=AD=94=E5=A4=8D: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC2981 (3798) > >Hi Randy: > Special delta parameters such as mteTriggerThresholdDeltaRising > was added to mteTriggerThresholdTable, but no delta parameters for > mteTriggerbooleanTable, why the difference? See the DESCRIPTION of mteTriggerTest for an outline of the difference between boolean and threshold trigger types. Perhaps the chart on page 5 will be helpful. There are several different kinds of triggers. In addition to the object monitored, some additional pieces of information are needed. Exactly *which* additional pieces of information depends upon the trigger type. The existing text mentioned in the proposed erratum merely says that sample type is irrelevant for an existence trigger. (I think it's obvious why that is true.) It doesn't mention the behaviour in the degenerate case where *none* of the bits of mteTriggerTest happens to be set, but I think the Postel Principle dictates that sample type would be irrelevant in that case as well. > I think the auther's intention is to TEST both absoluteValue > and deltaValue for threshold. The SYNTAX of mteTriggerSampleType is INTEGER, so only one of those values is possible for a given instance at any point in time, so I think that interpretation is incorrect. > Therefore mteTriggerSampleType is of no meaning for threshold, > otherwise, when mteTriggerSampleType is set to deltaValue, > mteTriggerThresholdRising and mteTriggerThresholdDeltaRising > which one to use? It's important to understand the explanatory text in the DESCRIPTION of=20 mteTriggerThresholdStartup, but I think the key point is to understand mteTriggerSampleType. If it's absoluteValue(1), (note well that it does NOT mean "absolute value" in the mathematical sense!!!) it simply means that the raw value that has been sampled is the input to the trigger evaluation funtion. If it's deltaValue(2) then it means that we're talking about the first derivative. I still think the erratum should be rejected, but welcome others' thoughts on the matter. Randy