On Mon, Feb 27, 2006 at 12:41:37PM +0100, Tom.Petch wrote:
> Alternatively, if a hop, eg 3, does not respond, then is the
> intention that that the entries go 1,2,4,5,6?
traceRouteHopsMinRtt:
"The minimum traceroute round-trip-time (RTT) received for
this hop. A value of 0 for this object implies that no
RTT has been received."
traceRouteHopsMaxRtt:
"The maximum traceroute round-trip-time (RTT) received for
this hop. A value of 0 for this object implies that no
RTT has been received."
I read this as "instantiate a row for all hops and set the RTT to 0 in
case a node did not respond". If rows would not be instantiated, there
would not be a need for the special values. (And of course it makes
sense to instantiate these rows because otherwise a truely broken
traceroute would not instantiate any rows, leaving ambiguity whether
the traceroute did actually run.)
While words can always be improved, I stick to my opinion that once
you write the code, it will be difficult to get this wrong. And
replacing "monotonic" with "strictly monotonic" does IMHO not answer
the question whether you instantiate a row if you do not get a
response or not. Perhaps you want to make a more concrete suggestion
what you think needs to be changed in this document.
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/> P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf