>1.)  Appropriateness of using DSCP (differentiated services code
>point) as a forwarding table index.

I agree.  As you point out, it was chosen because it was the obvious
translation from TOS, but I was never completely comfortable with it.
I never came up with a replacement that I was very happy with so I
didn't suggest anything else; I didn't think of an OID.  The thing
that I really wanted was something that's composable, e.g. the ability
to have two or more axes along which you can represent different routes,
like source prefix *and* DSCP.  It's possible to do this with the OID
but requires defining an OID per combination.  This is probably OK
since there will probably be a few common combinations.

>2.)  Appropriateness of offering only a full compliance statement
>when all reported implementations of the predecessor MIB (RFC 2096)
>provide just read-only access.

This may have simply been an oversight.  I agree that a read-only
implementation should be compliant.

>3.)  MIB changes that appear either to be gratuitous (replacing
>ipRouteDiscards with inetCidrRouteDiscards) or erroneous
>(not providing inetCidrRouteNumber) and which are inconsistent
>with the text of Section 8.

The IP-MIB revision (draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2011-update-01.txt) deprecates
ipRouteDiscards and ipv6DiscardedRoutes in favor of inetCidrRouteDiscards.
The thought was that you can't tell whether an ipRouteDiscards counts
v4-only (as it would if a system implemented RFC2011+2465) or both, so
it's better to define a new object with well defined semantics.  If we
decide that's not a good justification, we should remove
inetCidrRouteDiscards and un-deprecate ipRouteDiscards in 2011-update.

I agree that there should be an inetCidrRouteNumber.

  Bill
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to