[Syslog] Review of mib-11, part 3

Hi,

1) The idnits checker reports the use of the old copyright and
disclaimer boilerplates rather than the new copyright and disclaimer
boilerplates. These need to be updated.

2) syslogEntityOperationsReference uses a lower case "should". Is it
nto important for interoperability that this be done? If so, then this
should be a "SHOULD". If not for interoperability, why are we saying
it "should" be done?

3) I still have difficulty understanding why default parameters are
listed in the MIB module. What is the use case that requires these
objects in the MIB module?

Who decides what the default values should be? Since they are
read-write objects, I assume the purpose is to allow an NMS to set the
default values they want the sender to use. What happens if there are
multiple NMSs talking to the same sender? Then who decides? If each
NMS gets to decide, than you need a table in which each row is "owned"
by a particular NMS. I still don't see why this would be needed
however.

If the sender decides, and the objects exist only so the receivers can
check and see what the sender will use for defaults, then why are the
objects read-write? Once an NMS checks the defaults, what are they
supposed to do with this information?

I question whether this deserves to be in the MIB module at all, but
if it kept, then at least the MIB module should include a description
of why it is there and how it should be used.

4) RFCPROT is a reference in syslogDefaultTransportDomain; it probably
shoul dbe shown as [RFCPROT] or the RFC editor may overlook it.

David Harrington
dharrington@huawei.com 
dbharrington@comcast.net
ietfdbh@comcast.net

_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
Syslog@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog