I have been reviewing the doc as well as have some others within HP looking at it. While I don't have any additional comments yet, I do have a couple questions on your comments. While I agree that most clients will never use the MacXxxRecords, is that a valid rational not to include them? Would a better option be mark the MaxXxxRecords as OPTIONAL parts of the sections.
From: Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com<mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com>>
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 17:07:46 +0000
To: "wims at pwg.org<mailto:wims at pwg.org>" <wims at pwg.org<mailto:wims at pwg.org>>, Ira McDonald <blueroofmusic at gmail.com<mailto:blueroofmusic at gmail.com>>
Subject: [WIMS] High North has reviewed Power Model/MIB and has comments
(2) Technical - delete all 10 PowerGeneral.MaxXxxRecords elements
- section 5.1.1 through 5.1.10, lines 825-892
Rationale: Table limit elements are unlikely to be queried/used
- typical Client will simply attempt to create a row
Power MIB (wd-wimspowermib10-20100926.pdf/mib)
(2) Technical - delete all 10 powGeneral.MaxXxxRecords objects
- section 5 (spec), lines 261-363 and 389-413 (MIB)
Rationale: See Power Model comment (2) above
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.