Hi Suresh, We use the 'gBondTdimOperSvcPosition' not only as an index into a table but also report that field as part of a notification message. I believe that having MAX-ACCESS of 'not-accessible' would be problematic. Just as a reminder, the only index into the famous interfaces table (RFC 2863) is ifIndex and its MAX-ACCESS is also 'read-only'. Again, it might be because ifIndex appears also in notification messages (such as linkup and linkDown)
Best Regards, Moti -----Original Message----- From: Suresh Krishnan [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2012 11:31 PM To: General Area Review Team; [email protected] Subject: Gen-ART review of draft-ietf-adslmib-gbond-tdim-mib-07.txt I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for draft-ietf-adslmib-gbond-tdim-mib-07.txt For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>. Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a Proposed Standard. I do have a potential concern that you may like to address. Minor ===== * Section 6: MIB definition The index field 'gBondTdimOperSvcPosition' of 'gBondTdimOperSvcEntry' is defined to have a MAX-ACCESS of 'read-only'. I believe that it should instead be defined with a MAX-ACCESS of 'not-accessible' since it is an index field. Thanks Suresh This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains information which is CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI Telecom. If you have received this transmission in error, please inform us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then delete the original and all copies thereof. _______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
