Subject: [Dime] WRONG allocations for DIME MIB modules

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 17:15:19 +0100

While performing the AD reviews for the two MIB documents I fell upon
the fact that the two MIB modules use the same root {mib-2 119}

This is probably done in order to pass compilation, but without any
explanation it can misguide early implementers. 

This is  wrong for at least three reasons: 

1. RFC 4181 recommends that allocation of the OIDs for the MIB module be
made only by IANA after the document is approved. 

2. {mib-2 119} is already allocated and used by another IETF standard
MIB. If the authors wanted to use the experimental tree the OID should
have been {experimental 119}

3. Both diameterBaseProtocolMIB and diameterCCAMIB use the same OID

If anybody plans to implement the MIB modules prior to I-D publication
they MUST NOT use the OIDs in the current document. This is the
principal reason for which I am sending this warning prior to the full
AD review. 

I strongly recommend to follow the recommendations in RFC 4181 section
3.5.2 - like: 

diameterBaseProtocolMIB         { mib-2 XXX }

      Editor's Note (to be removed prior to publication):  the IANA is
      requested to assign a value for "XXX" under the 'mib-2' subtree
      and to record the assignment in the SMI Numbers registry.  When
      the assignment has been made, the RFC Editor is asked to replace
      "XXX" (here and in the MIB module) with the assigned value and to
      remove this note.

The IANA Considerations sections must include the requests to allocate
two - different - values for the two MIB modules. 

Thanks and Regards,

Dan

---

From: "Glen Zorn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 10:48:16 +0700

> two - different - values for the two MIB modules.

OK.

> 
> Thanks and Regards,
> 
> Dan
> _______________________________________________
> DiME mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dime