Nut upsdev - Dec 2021 - NUT RFC: Disposition of comments by David Zomaya

Hello David, thanks for the close reading.

I propose the following disposition of your comments. Note that resolution of 
the Section 4.3.2 comment probably requires discussion in the mailing list.

Thanks again for your comments, Roger

________________________________________________________________________________
Section 2.8
> "Data lead" may be confusing. Suggest replacing "the system
to which the data
> lead is connected is known as the primary" with something more
explicit such
> as "the system which communicates directly with the UPS unit (e.g.
using a
> USB, RS232, or network connection) is known as the primary"
Done.
________________________________________________________________________________
Section 3
> In Figure 4: UPS protects multiple systems "but if the UPS had status
"OB" the
> Secondary shuts down." Should there be additional text that the OB
shutdown
> depends on the configuration? i.e. while the default case may be to shut
down,
> it is a configurable setting.
The note below figure 4 says ? but if the UPS had status OB the Secondary shuts 
down. ? This is the current behaviour built into NUT's upsmon.  The NUT RFC 
follows upsd and upsmon closely, but clearly a different Management Daemon could
do something different.

I propose changing the text to ? but if the UPS had status OB the Secondary 
may choose to shut down as a precaution. ?
________________________________________________________________________________
Section 4.2.1
> Suggest replacing "trio" with "3" or "three"
for simplicity
Done.  Replaced "a trio of" by "three".
________________________________________________________________________________
Section 4.2.3
> Suggest dropping "high-level" from " In current practice,
commands such as
> "FSD" are made available only to a high-level administrative user
(2.2)" to
> match other references to the administrative user
Done. The sentence now reads ? In current practice, commands such as FSD are 
made available only to a privileged administrative user (2.2) authorized to send
such a mission critical command. ?
________________________________________________________________________________
Section 4.2.7
> Suggest changing "then go off and wait for the response" to
"wait"
Done.
________________________________________________________________________________
Section 4.2.3
> Can we add what "FSD" is an acronynm for (Forced ShutDown)? E.g.
reword 1st
> line to "A Management Daemon (2.6) which is Primary (2.8) and has the
required
> authority, uses this command to set status symbol "FSD" (forced
shutdown) in
> the Attachment Daemon (2.1)." Related: FSD is spelled out as
"Forced ShutDown"
> in 6.5.1 and "Forced Shut Down" in 5.1. Should be consistent
throughout
Done. Replaced ? uses this command to set status symbol FSD in the Attachment 
Daemon. ? to ? uses this command to set status symbol FSD meaning "Forced 
Shutdown" in the Attachment Daemon. ?.

Spell out FSD as "Forced Shutdown". 
________________________________________________________________________________
Section 4.3.2. Error Responses
> There are security implications to returning INVALID-USERNAME and 
> INVALID-PASSWORD discretely, do we need to be concerned with these? If yes,
> maybe we should combine them into INVALID-CREDENTIALS? Some general
discussion
> on the topic here: 
>
https://security.stackexchange.com/questions/17816/username-and-or-password-invalid-why-do-websites-show-this-kind-of-message-i
This would be a design change rather than an editorial matter.  It would be 
better to raise the matter for discussion in the mailing list. 
________________________________________________________________________________
Section 5.1
> The term "public supply" is used four times. I understand this
means
> utility/wall power/where the UPS is plugged in. I would suggest something
like
> "input power source", "input" "utility",
"utility power", or "wall power" as
> more common/easy to understand. For reference, the HID PDC spec 
> (https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/pdcv11.pdf) uses "input
source
> power", "Input", and "utility" (probably best to
pick just 1).
> Note that "wall power" is used elsewhere in the RFC draft and we
should
> change/leave it alone as needed based on any changes here
I propose using "input power supply".  I have reviewed section 5.1 and
made
7 changes.  I added a sentence to section 1.1 How to Read this Document.
> Regarding: " Note: "OB" does not imply "DISCHRG"
if the battery is floating."
> Is there a specific UPS feature or scenario driving this note? Generally,
if
> the UPS is operating off the battery, it is discharging it.
I propose removing to remove the notes from CHRG and DISCHRG.
> Suggest removing "is offline," from the OB definition to avoid
confusion
> between "offline" and the various definitions of OFF from
different UPS
> topologies and models
Done.
________________________________________________________________________________
Section 5.2
> Suggest changing "deduces" to "detects"
Ok, done.
________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix A
> Suggest replacing "domestic" with "consumer-grade" to
avoid confusion around
> the term "domestic" being used as the opposite of
"international".
Done.
________________________________________________________________________________
Appendix B
> In Step 7, is the description of the outlets only shutting off correct in
the
> common case? Many UPSes do not offer outlet control and if they are on 
> battery, a shutdown command will eventually lead to them shutting off.
This is a delicate matter.  Back in the ISO we saw the difference between 
Informative Annexes and Normative Annexes, but the entire current NUT RFC is 
"Informative" only.  However it is realistic to expect that one day
the text
will be run through the formal IETF Standards Track process and will become 
normative, so it is important to say now that Appendix B is a "helpful 
introduction" and no more.

I intended Appendix B to give new-comers an introduction to the subject, not to 
be a definitive statement of what "shutdown" of a UPS means for every
model.  I
choose the case in which the outlets are disconnected with an audible signal 
that a new-comer can hear.  In the past this has helped in mailing list 
assistance.

I will add words to say that the audible outlet disconnection is only an 
example, and that other UPS units may behave differently.  However the common 
point is that the outlets are no longer powered.  See Appendix D for details.

________________________________________________________________________________
End of resolution of comments.

Thanks Roger. Good stuff!
> Note that resolution of the Section 4.3.2 comment probably requires
discussion in the mailing list.
I'll create a thread on the topic. I think we may be fine as-is, but
it's probably worth making sure the decision is purposeful given all the
potential use cases.

Thank you,
David Zomaya
Eaton Tripp Lite
________________________________
 This message is for the addressee's use only. It may contain confidential
information. If you receive this message in error, please delete it and notify
the sender. Tripp Lite disclaims all warranties and liabilities, and assumes no
responsibility for viruses which may infect an email sent to you from Tripp Lite
and which damage your electronic systems or information. It is your
responsibility to maintain virus detection systems to prevent damage to your
electronic systems and information.