Subject: [Dime] comments on draft-ietf-dime-diameter-base-protocol-mib-00.txt

From: Tina TSOU <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:45:43 +0800

Hi,
Some comments on draft-ietf-dime-diameter-base-protocol-mib-00.txt are below.

In the first paragraph of section 3, there is a statement saying "four standard applications have been defined to date, ...; others may be defined in the future". 
This doesn't seem to be not very accurate. There are many diameter applications defined in 3GPP, ITU-T, and ETSI TISPAN. So I suggest to remove this paragraph or at least this statement fromthis paragraph.

In the second paragraph of section 3, it says "This MIB defines objects supporting the management of the Diameter base protocol as described in [RFC3588]." 
Just for clarification, is this MIB applicable to RFC3588bis or RFC3588? Or both?

B. R.
Tina
http://tinatsou.weebly.com/contact.html

---

From: "Glen Zorn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 14:20:37 +0700

Tina Tsou [mailto://[email-masked]] <mailto:[mailto://[email-masked]%5d>
writes:

Hi,

Some comments on draft-ietf-dime-diameter-base-protocol-mib-00.txt are
below. 

In the first paragraph of section 3, there is a statement saying "four
standard applications have been defined to date, ...; others may be defined
in the future". 

This doesn't seem to be not very accurate. There are many diameter
applications defined in 3GPP, ITU-T, and ETSI TISPAN. So I suggest to remove
this paragraph or at least this statement fromthis paragraph.

OK.

In the second paragraph of section 3, it says "This MIB defines objects
supporting the management of the Diameter base protocol as described in
[RFC3588]." 

Just for clarification, is this MIB applicable to RFC3588bis or RFC3588? Or
both?

The MIB was developed a long time ago to support RFC 3588.  Presumably,
since rfc3588bis is claimed to be backward-compatible w/RFC 3588, it should
be applicable to both. 

B. R.
Tina