Re: Comment on GMPLS TE MIB

["Thomas D. Nadeau" <tnadeau@cisco.com>]

        Thanks. We will address this in the next revision
of the draft.

        --Tom

>         Just noticed the following consistency nit and wanted to pass it on
>         rather than waiting for accumulate more comments...
>
>         The names of the two scalars in the GMPLS TE MIB could be made
>         consistent- either use "Tunnels" in both of them or use "Tunnel" 
> in both
>         of them. I vote for  using "Tunnels" in both names.
>
>
> /Baktha Muralidharan
> Cisco Systems
> Chelmsford, MA.
>
> ==================================================
> -- GMPLS Tunnel scalars.
>
> gmplsTunnelsConfigured OBJECT-TYPE
> SYNTAX  Unsigned32
> MAX-ACCESS read-only
> STATUS  current
> DESCRIPTION
> "The number of GMPLS tunnels configured on this device. A tunnel is 
> considered configured if an entry for the tunnel exists in the 
> gmplsTunnelTable and the associated mplsTunnelRowStatusis active(1)."
>
> ::= { gmplsTeScalars 1 }
>
> gmplsTunnelActive OBJECT-TYPE
> SYNTAX  Unsigned32
> MAX-ACCESS read-only
> STATUS  current
> DESCRIPTION
> "The number of GMPLS tunnels active on this device. A tunnel is considered 
> active if there is an entry in the gmplsTunnelTable and the associated 
> mplsTunnelOperStatus for the tunnel is up(1)."
>
> ::= { gmplsTeScalars 2 }


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.