Subject: summary of issues I've raised with the Alarm MIB

From: David Partain <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 15:46:26 +0100

Hi,

In the interest of collecting everything in one place rather than
a bunch of different pieces of e-mail, here is the list of things
I've sent in.  It's not an attempt to go through the arguments
again, just to collect them so they don't get lost.  Everything's
been brought up in previous mail.

 * Identification of resources by OIDs (_most_ important)
 
   I think it's _very very_ important that we use OIDs for
   resource naming rather than the current integer/integer pair.

 * Inclusion of "user-friendly" textual information in the
   generic traps.

 * Need to clarify what happens to an alarmModelEntry when
   it goes notInService.

 * Change indices to not-accessible or accessible-for-notify as
   appropriate.  This necessitates small changes in object
   groups, as well.

 * Add MODULE-IDENTITY macros where needed

 * How can alarmActiveTable and alarmClearTable share an index
   from alarmActiveTable given that when an alarm is cleared it
   is moved to alarmClearTable and the corresponding entry in
   alarmActiveTable is removed?

 * Add a SHOULD or MUST to objects that use DateAndTime stating
   that they agents should provide timezone information.  Randy's
   mail on 10 January 2002 would be great.

 * Need clarification on how alarmModelVarbindIndex works

 * Small change:  move alarmNotifications from { alarmMIB 2 } to
   { alarmMIB 0 } do you don't have to have { alarmNotifications 0 1 }
   but can instead just have { alarmNotifications 1 }.
   I realize this is cosmetic.

In the interest of being concrete about what I'd change, I've put
a diff against the current -04 draft as well as my version after
the changes at http://www.cs.utk.edu/~partain/disman
Much of what's listed above is _not_ in my edits.

I'm not particularly married to any of the textual changes I
made, so change as you see fit.

This list will be at
http://www.cs.utk.edu/~partain/disman/issues.txt
and will be updated as I come up with new things :-)

Cheers,

dlp

---

From: "David T. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:37:20 -0800

HI,

On the following...

>   appropriate.  This necessitates small changes in object

It is not legal to have the access of index objects as 
accessible-for-notify.

Regards,
/david t. perkins