Hi Juergen, On this point:
On 12/21/15 4:33 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > And > should the interface reference not use a more specific type than > 'string’? >> Interface references can be many things, from standard naming we are >> familiar, e.g. ge-1/0/0.1 to a numerical value like 13276. Leaving it as >> string gives us most flexibility in that regards. > I disagree that the goal here is most flexibility. We do have an > interfaces data model in the IETF. Why are we avoiding to refer to it > here? > I think it would be helpful if you could be specific as to your concern. It is absolutely the case that the SNMP folk did an awful lot of work on managing interfaces. While I am not concerned about the form of the name, I wonder if your concern is around some of the semantics, but I can't tell. Eliot
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ netmod mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
