RFC 5060, "Protocol Independent Multicast MIB", January 2008Source of RFC: pim (rtg)
Errata ID: 1447
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Alfred Hoenes
Date Reported: 2008-06-14
Rejected by: Adrian Farrel
Date Rejected: 2011-09-28
Section 5, pg.32 ff. says:
The description clauses of many columnar objects in the
PIM (*,G) State Table are underspecified:
If an object is "used with" a specific variant of PIM,
what is the desired behavior for other variants?
- shall the object be instantiated or not?
- if yes, what's the default / substitute value in this case?
- shouldn't such defaults be listed in DEFAULT clauses ?
Similar deficiencies also exist in the descriptions of objects
in other MIB tables in this MIB module.
I don't see this as underspecified at all. In fact, objects like pimSGPimMode
and pimStaticRPPimMode are very specific in only supporting a limited range of
modes for the entire table. In effect, if another mode is in use, the table
cannot be used by definition.