Subject: [imss] RE: imss WG Last Call: Fibre Channel RSCN, Fabric Config Svr, and Zone Svr MIBs

From: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 17 Sep 2006 20:20:31 +0300

draft-ietf-imss-fc-rscn-mib-00.txt

1. smilint complains about: 

mibs/T11-FC-RSCN-MIB:217: [1] {internal-other} parse error, unexpected
LOWERCASE_IDENTIFIER, expecting '}' or ','
mibs/T11-FC-RSCN-MIB:227: [5] {internal-flushing} warning: flushing
recent incorrect declaration, see previous error(s)
mibs/T11-FC-RSCN-MIB:170: [2] {type-unknown} unknown type
`T11FcRscnStatsEntry'

All seem due to a missing comma in 

t11FcRscnSwRscnRejects             Counter32

 2. 
   Note that an interface's ifIndex value must be unique within an SNMP
   context, irrespective of how many Fibre Channel management instances
   (see below) and how many Fibre Channel switches are instrumented
   within that SNMP context.

What do we exactly mean by 'SNMP context' ? I believe that the meaning
is of a management domain modeled by SMIv2 MIBs or fiber channel
management instance, not necessarily SNMP-related.
draft-ietf-imss-fc-fcs-mib-00.txt got it better, 'SNMP context' is only
an example there. 

3. The Security Considerations section does not really provide an
explanation about the hazards in intentionally or unintentionally
misconfiguring the read-write objects (probably suppressing information,
or flooding the network with undesired notifications) 

draft-ietf-imss-fc-fcs-mib-00.txt

1. smilints returns 3 warnings: 

T11-FC-FABRIC-CONFIG-SERVER-MIB:773: [5] {index-element-not-accessible}
warning: exactly one index element of row `t11FcsPortListEntry' must be
accessible
mibs/T11-FC-FABRIC-CONFIG-SERVER-MIB:80: [5] {type-without-format}
warning: type `T11ListIndex' has no format specification
mibs/T11-FC-FABRIC-CONFIG-SERVER-MIB:90: [5] {type-without-format}
warning: type `T11ListIndexPointer' has no format specification

2. Some of the read-write objects have no DEFVAL defined -
t11FcsFabricDiscoveryRangeLow, t11FcsFabricDiscoveryRangeHigh,
t11FcsFabricDiscoveryStart

 draft-ietf-imss-fc-zs-mib-00.txt

1. I was expecting the Security Considerations section of this document
to include more details about the security issues related to the
read-write objects in the MIB modules. While it is true that intentional
or unintentional misconfiguration can lead to some kind of connectivity
problems there are however differences in the level of threats generated
by attacking fabric controls and generation of notifications. These need
to be separately articulated IMO. 

2. It is not clear to me how t11FLockTable entries work in the case of a
non SNMP lock creation. How is a new row protected so that it will not
be manipulated by CLI while in SNMP creation and the other way? If there
are some assumptions about a common underCreation state, they need to be
clearly articulated. 

3. I do not have the T11 reference at hand, but I wonder why objects
like t11FLockRejectReasonCodeExp have a SYNTAX of OCTET STRING. In any
case, I would suggest a DISPLAY-HINT clause for these. 

4. In T11ZoningName, what does 'letter' mean - ASCII only or
internationalized as in SnmpAdminString? 

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
> Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 3:26 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: [email-masked]; Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Subject: imss WG Last Call: Fibre Channel RSCN, Fabric Config 
> Svr, and Zone Svr MIBs
> 
> This is to announce an imss WG Last Call on the following 
> three MIB drafts:
> 
>      Fibre Channel Registered State Change Notification (RSCN) MIB
>                    draft-ietf-imss-fc-rscn-mib-00.txt
> 
>              Fibre-Channel Fabric Configuration Server MIB
>                    draft-ietf-imss-fc-fcs-mib-00.txt
> 
>                      Fibre-Channel Zone Server MIB
>                     draft-ietf-imss-fc-zs-mib-00.txt
>  
> This WG Last Call will run through 12 midnight Eastern Time 
> on Sunday, September 17, 2006 (your WG chair hopes to deal 
> with Last Call results during the week of September 18th).
> 
> Technical comments *must* be sent to the imss mailing list.
> Editorial comments may be sent directly to the draft editor 
> (but please cc: me) - all three drafts have the same editor:
> 
> 		Keith McCloghrie [[email-masked]]
> 
> Thanks,
> --David (imss WG chair)
> ----------------------------------------------------
> David L. Black, Senior Technologist
> EMC Corporation, 176 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
> +1 (508) 293-7953             FAX: +1 (508) 293-7786
> [email-masked]        Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
> ----------------------------------------------------
> 

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