RFC Errata


Errata Search

 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 1 record.

Status: Held for Document Update (1)

RFC 4935, "Fibre Channel Fabric Configuration Server MIB", August 2007

Source of RFC: imss (ops)

Errata ID: 1030

Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Technical

Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2007-09-12
Held for Document Update by: Dan Romascanu

 

(1)  Section 4 -- missing articles

On page 5 of RFC 4935, the last paragraph of Section 4 says:

   This MIB imports some common Textual Conventions from T11-TC-MIB
   [RFC4439] and from T11-FC-NAME-SERVER-MIB [RFC4438].  It also imports
   URLString from NETWORK-SERVICES-MIB [RFC2788].

It should perhaps better say:

|  This MIB imports some common Textual Conventions from the T11-TC-MIB
|  [RFC4439] and from the T11-FC-NAME-SERVER-MIB [RFC4438].  It also
|  imports URLString from the NETWORK-SERVICES-MIB [RFC2788].


(2)  Section 5.3 -- typo

The first paragraph of Section 5.3, on page 6, says:
                                                          v
|  With multiple Fabrics, each Fabric has its own instances of the
   Fabric-related management instrumentation.  [...]

It should say:

|  With multiple Fabrics, each Fabric has its own instance of the
   Fabric-related management instrumentation.  [...]


(3)  Section 5.4 -- unspecific text

Section 5.4, on top of page 7, says:

   This section describes the six MIB groups contained in the MIB
|  module.

It should more specifically say, e.g.:

   This section describes the six MIB groups contained in the MIB
|  module defined in Section 6.
         ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

(4)  Section 6


(4a) improper use of term

In the DESCRIPTION clause of MODULE-IDENTITY invocation, in the first
line on page 10, the term "MIB" should be replaced by the standards-
conformant term "MIB module".


(4b) missing article

In the DESCRIPTION clause of the t11FcsFabricDiscoveryTable OBJECT-TYPE
declaration, on top of page 15, the RFC says:

            "This table contains control information for discovery
            of Fabric configuration by switches.

It should better say:
                                                         vvvv
|           "This table contains control information for the discovery
            of Fabric configuration by switches.


(4c) word replication

In the DESCRIPTION clause of the t11FcsFabricDiscoveryStart OBJECT-TYPE
declaration, on mid-page 16, the RFC says:
                                                              vvvvv
                                     [...].  It is recommended that
            whenever an instance of this object is set to 'start',
|           that the desired range be specified at the same time by
            ^^^^^
            setting the corresponding instances of
            t11FcsFabricDiscoveryRangeLow and
            t11FcsFabricDiscoveryRangeHigh.

It should better say:

                                     [...].  It is recommended that
            whenever an instance of this object is set to 'start',
|           the desired range be specified at the same time by
            setting the corresponding instances of
            t11FcsFabricDiscoveryRangeLow and
            t11FcsFabricDiscoveryRangeHigh.


(4d) mis-specification

The DESCRIPTION clause of the t11FcsIeMgmtAddrListIndex OBJECT-TYPE
declaration, at the bottom of page 21, says:

            "The management address list for this Interconnect Element.
|           This object points to an entry in the
            t11FcsMgmtAddrListTable."

This is not true.  Cf. the corresponding description of the
T11FcListIndexPointerOrZero TEXTUAL-CONVENTION and the description
clauses for the t11FcsMgmtAddrListTable pointed to by this object.
In fact, this object points to a 'slice' in the
t11FcsMgmtAddrListTable, namely the set of entries with common
third index equal to the value of the row instance of this object.

Therefore, the RFC should say either:

            "The management address list for this Interconnect Element.
|           This object points to a particular list in the
            t11FcsMgmtAddrListTable."

or:

            "The management address list for this Interconnect Element.
|           This object points to a set of entries in the
            t11FcsMgmtAddrListTable."

This issue recurs.
Similar changes need to be applied to the occurrences of "an entry"
in the DESCRIPTION clauses of the following OBJECT-TYPE declarations:

(4e)
  - t11FcsPortAttachPortNameIndex (at the bottom of page 25),

(4f)
  - t11FcsPlatformNodeNameListIndex (on page 30),  and

(4g)
  - t11FcsPlatformMgmtAddrListIndex (on page 30),


(4h) insufficient / inappropriate specification

The DESCRIPTION clause of the t11FcsPlatformSysMgmtAddr OBJECT-TYPE
declaration (on page 32) says:

|           "A list of management addresses for the platform."

This is misleading; taken literally, it would replicate precisely
the semantics specified for the t11FcsPlatformMgmtAddrListIndex
object (on page 30).  This cannot have been intended.

I strongly suspect that the RFC should say instead:

|           "A list of management addresses for the hosting
|            system of the platform."


(4i) incomplete specification

The DESCRIPTION clause of the t11FcsDiscoveryCompleteNotify
NOTIFICATION-TYPE declaration (near the bottom of page 40) says:

            "This notification is generated by the Fabric
            Configuration Server on the completion of the
            discovery of Fabrics in the range that has
|           t11FcsFabricDiscoveryRangeLow at its low end."

This is incomplete and misleading;
the upper limit of the Fabric index needs to be specified as well.

Thus, the RFC should say:

            "This notification is generated by the Fabric
            Configuration Server on the completion of the
            discovery of Fabrics in the range that has
|           t11FcsFabricDiscoveryRangeLow at its low end and
|           t11FcsFabricDiscoveryRangeHigh at its high end."


IMHO, in particular the items (4a) and (4d) ... (4i) above
deserve being addressed by an appropriate RFC Errata Note.

Report New Errata



Search RFCs
Advanced Search
×