Thanks for the quick feedback, David!
I'm happy to leave this in your hands - one comment only:
--On tirsdag, januar 17, 2006 11:02:36 -0500 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The term "running at high speed" is a gating criterion for whether or
not the HS counters are mandatory, but I can't see that it's defined in
a testable way. Might have missed it - it would logically seem to
belong in section 7.5.
Unfortunately, it's fuzzy and not testable in all cases. Here's what
RFC 4181 (Section 4.6.1.2) has to say about this issue:
Henceforth "standard" MIB modules MAY
use the Counter64 type when it makes sense to do so, and MUST use
Counter64 if the information being modelled would wrap in less than
one hour if the Counter32 type was used instead.
It clearly "makes sense" to use the Counter64 type, as there are SCSI
implementations that clearly need it based on the "would wrap in less
than one hour" criterion. Would adapting the quoted RFC 4181 text
(with a reference to RFC 4181) be sufficient to satisfy your concern?
What I'd like to see is something that makes it a complete no-brainer
whether or not the HC counters are needed, for instance:
If the interconnect speed is higher than 4 Gbits/second, the HC counters
MUST be implemented, since that makes it possible to spin the counters
in one hour (see [RFC4181]).
I wouldn't like someone to say "but... my implementation has a 10G
interface, but it's so badly implemented that I can't possibly get more
than 1 million operations per second through it, so I don't need to
implement the HC counters, do I?"
(4G is picked out of thin air, but illustrates the problem... if The Number
is 3G, then 4G FC needs to implement it; if The Number is 9G, then only
people with 10GE and Infiniband interfaces need bother...)
But you know this stuff, I don't....
Harald
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
