From mailman-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 1 08:24:17 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA19374 for ; Thu, 1 Jul 2004 08:24:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bfxqg-0001mK-Q5 for entmib-archive@lists.ietf.org; Thu, 01 Jul 2004 05:27:18 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: ietf.org mailing list memberships reminder From: mailman-owner@ietf.org To: entmib-archive@ietf.org X-No-Archive: yes Message-ID: Date: Thu, 01 Jul 2004 05:07:25 -0400 Precedence: bulk X-BeenThere: mailman@lists.ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 List-Id: Mailman site list X-List-Administrivia: yes Sender: mailman-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: mailman-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit This is a reminder, sent out once a month, about your ietf.org mailing list memberships. It includes your subscription info and how to use it to change it or unsubscribe from a list. You can visit the URLs to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on. In addition to the URL interfaces, you can also use email to make such changes. For more info, send a message to the '-request' address of the list (for example, mailman-request@ietf.org) containing just the word 'help' in the message body, and an email message will be sent to you with instructions. ********************************************************************** NOTE WELL: Any submission to the IETF intended by the Contributor for publication as all or part of an IETF Internet-Draft or RFC and any statement made within the context of an IETF activity is considered an "IETF Contribution". Such statements include oral statements in IETF sessions, as well as written and electronic communications made at any time or place, which are addressed to: o the IETF plenary session, o any IETF working group or portion thereof, o the IESG, or any member thereof on behalf of the IESG, o the IAB or any member thereof on behalf of the IAB, o any IETF mailing list, including the IETF list itself, any working group or design team list, or any other list functioning under IETF auspices, o the RFC Editor or the Internet-Drafts function All IETF Contributions are subject to the rules of RFC 3667 and RFC 3668. Statements made outside of an IETF session, mailing list or other function, that are clearly not intended to be input to an IETF activity, group or function, are not IETF Contributions in the context of this notice. Please consult RFC 3667 for details. ******************************************************************************* If you have questions, problems, comments, etc, send them to mailman-owner@ietf.org. Thanks! Passwords for entmib-archive@lists.ietf.org: List Password // URL ---- -------- entmib@ietf.org CNIo https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/options/entmib/entmib-archive%40lists.ietf.org From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 15 14:08:34 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA09770 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:08:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlAWk-00055k-B7; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:00:14 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlAOI-0003IM-AM for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:51:30 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA08680 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:51:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlAOH-000655-7Y for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:51:29 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BlANM-0005jJ-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:50:33 -0400 Received: from hoemail2.lucent.com ([192.11.226.163]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BlAMN-0005L4-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:49:31 -0400 Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by hoemail2.lucent.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i6FHnTf9022418 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:49:30 -0500 (CDT) Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:49:28 +0200 Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06041@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" To: "Entmib-wg (E-mail)" Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:49:28 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Subject: [Entmib] AD review of: draft-ietf-entmib-v3-04.txt (Draft Standard) X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org I think it is basically ready for IETF Last Call. Which I will issue/request now. Some nits/admin things: - the I-D boiler plate should not use citation to RFC2026 And that means ref to 2026 can go away - Should reference to RFC1493 be updated to point to draft-ietf-bridge-bridgemib-smiv2-06.txt (or add a note that if that one gets published before this doc that the ref is updated)? - copyright 2003 should be 2004 (in DESCRIPTION clause of MODULE-IDENTITY. Thanks, Bert _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 15 14:08:55 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA09792 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:08:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlAXT-0005BT-Hz; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:00:59 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlAP1-0003X9-Qz for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:52:17 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA08723 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:52:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlAP0-0006OQ-Ic for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:52:14 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BlAO1-000637-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:51:13 -0400 Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com ([192.11.222.161]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BlAMv-0005L2-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:50:05 -0400 Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i6FHnT3N021886 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 12:49:30 -0500 (CDT) Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:49:28 +0200 Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06040@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" To: Margaret Wasserman Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 19:49:28 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Cc: "Entmib-wg \(E-mail\)" Subject: [Entmib] RE: Publication Request: Entity MIB to Draft Standard X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Inline, sorry for (very) late follow up. > -----Original Message----- > From: Margaret Wasserman [mailto:margaret@thingmagic.com] > Sent: woensdag 5 mei 2004 15:13 > To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) > Subject: RE: Publication Request: Entity MIB to Draft Standard > > > > Hi Bert, > > At 12:06 PM +0200 5/5/04, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > >Follow up. > >The report itself looks nice. It speaks about rev 3 of the new > >doc, while we will do IETF Last Call for rev 4. I assume that > >the report applies equally well, and if so, then it is probably > >best to update the text of the report to also refrence rev 4. > > Yes, rev 4 just deprecates some objects. It is quite easy for me to > change the text to reference rev 4 and I will do so. > The text on IETF web page still talks about revision 3. > >The report links to 2 other html files which in turn link to > >another 10 or so other files. Not sure how well the secretariat will > >handle that. Is it too much work to merge it all into one file.. > >i.e. have the summary at the top and the details further down. > > This will be somewhat trickier. I already sent the pointer to the > secretariat, so I wonder what they'll do with it... Unless the > secretariat manages to do something useful first, I'll try to come up > with a merged version this weekend. > The version on the IETF web page still has ptrs to many files on psg.com. I actually do not know if this is considered a problem or not. Still would be nice to get it fixed. Bert > Margaret > _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 15 14:52:38 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA13452 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:52:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlBGW-0002Av-UF; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:47:32 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlB78-0007e5-HM for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:37:50 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA11953 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:37:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlB77-0005ZF-8D for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:37:49 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BlB64-0005Be-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:36:45 -0400 Received: from zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.57]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BlB5F-0004kF-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:35:53 -0400 Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69]) by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id i6FIZLH19892 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:35:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:35:22 -0400 Message-ID: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4C27FE3@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> From: "Sharon Chisholm" To: "Entmib-wg (E-mail)" Subject: RE: [Entmib] AD review of: draft-ietf-entmib-v3-04.txt (Draft Sta ndard) Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:35:13 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org hi This version of the MIB deprecates entAliasMappingIdentifier which I think is a huge mistake. It's a critical object and there are implementations in the works. I had previously proposed deferring progression of this document until such time as we had the necessary implementations of this particular object. It doesn't seem to me that progressing along the standards track provides much of a benefit compared to the hole left if this is removed. Sharon -----Original Message----- From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com] Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 1:49 PM To: Entmib-wg (E-mail) Subject: [Entmib] AD review of: draft-ietf-entmib-v3-04.txt (Draft Standard) I think it is basically ready for IETF Last Call. Which I will issue/request now. Some nits/admin things: - the I-D boiler plate should not use citation to RFC2026 And that means ref to 2026 can go away - Should reference to RFC1493 be updated to point to draft-ietf-bridge-bridgemib-smiv2-06.txt (or add a note that if that one gets published before this doc that the ref is updated)? - copyright 2003 should be 2004 (in DESCRIPTION clause of MODULE-IDENTITY. Thanks, Bert _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 15 22:20:18 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA06396 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 22:20:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlIIj-0000ed-Cd; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 22:18:17 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlB03-0005a9-CH for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:30:31 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA11186 for ; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:30:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BlB02-000370-81 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:30:30 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BlAyv-0002o1-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:29:21 -0400 Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BlAyT-0002Um-00; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:28:53 -0400 Received: from apache by megatron.ietf.org with local (Exim 4.32) id 1BlAuZ-0003dC-N7; Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:24:51 -0400 X-test-idtracker: no To: IETF-Announce From: The IESG Message-Id: Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 14:24:51 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 22:18:15 -0400 Cc: entmib@ietf.org Subject: [Entmib] Last Call: 'Entity MIB (Version 3)' to Draft Standard X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: iesg@ietf.org List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org The IESG has received a request from the Entity MIB WG to consider the following document: - 'Entity MIB (Version 3) ' as a Draft Standard The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send any comments to the iesg@ietf.org or ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2004-08-06 (extended 3 week Last Call because of upcoming IETF 60). The file can be obtained via http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-entmib-v3-04.txt Implementation Report can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/IESG/implementation.html _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 19 12:51:10 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA04797 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:51:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmb3y-0004TP-Bn; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:32:26 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmals-0000gj-Gr for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:13:44 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA01528 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:13:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmalr-0000r0-Le for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:13:43 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmal3-0000XO-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:12:53 -0400 Received: from mail.thingmagic.com ([207.31.248.245] helo=thingmagic.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmaif-0000Co-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:10:25 -0400 Received: from [207.31.248.169] (account margaret HELO [10.0.0.78]) by thingmagic.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP-TLS id 114526 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:07:44 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: margaret@mail.thingmagic.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 12:10:18 -0400 To: entmib@ietf.org From: Margaret Wasserman Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Hi again, Just so that everyone knows, I have _not_ requested an Entity MIB meeting for San Diego. If you have any strong objection to this decision, please let me know before 5pm EST today. We do need to finish the Entity State MIB and get it submitted to the IESG, but I don't think that the remaining issues justify a face-to-face meeting. I also support the idea that Kaj Tesink's draft should be completed and published, but it is not in-charter for this group and I am not prepared to take on new charter items at this time. Folks who want to work on this should talk to Kaj and/or Bert Wijnen and decide how to move it forward. Perhaps an individual submission would make the most sense given that it is a short/simple MIB? Margaret At 3:24 PM -0400 6/17/04, Margaret Wasserman wrote: >Hi All, > >We should decide soon whether or not the Entity MIB WG will meet in >San Diego. Thoughts? > >If we do meet, what are the likely agenda items? > >Margaret > > >_______________________________________________ >Entmib mailing list >Entmib@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 19 13:30:47 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA08829 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:30:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmbqX-0005P3-74; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:22:37 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmbfm-0003b4-1O for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:11:30 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA06971 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:11:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmbfl-00028B-1F for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:11:29 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmbet-0001rB-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:10:35 -0400 Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com ([198.152.12.100]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmbe9-0001ZW-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:09:49 -0400 Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id i6JH8Meq012140 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:08:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from IS0004AVEXU1.global.avaya.com (h135-64-105-51.avaya.com [135.64.105.51]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id i6JH8Jeq012048 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:08:20 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:09:46 +0300 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Thread-Index: AcRtsKK+XeXj36j6QM6Qo5l+u3PL2QAAZtww From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: "Margaret Wasserman" , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Margaret, I do not have a strong objection to Entity MIB WG not meeting in San = Diego. I would like however to see the 'Entity MIB Extensions for manufacturing = date and physical module identification' a.k.a 'Kaj's draft' being = continued and worked out as a standards track document. What are the = reasons that you are not prepared to take this charter item, which seems = to have received a fair amount of interest? I believe this is relative = small amount of work, and possibly Kaj can complete it in one or two = rounds if we do not philosophize too much around it. I volunteered to be = a reviewer. There may be no need for meetings.=20 Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org=20 > [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Margaret Wasserman > Sent: 19 July, 2004 7:10 PM > To: entmib@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? >=20 >=20 >=20 > Hi again, >=20 > Just so that everyone knows, I have _not_ requested an Entity MIB=20 > meeting for San Diego. If you have any strong objection to this=20 > decision, please let me know before 5pm EST today. >=20 > We do need to finish the Entity State MIB and get it submitted to the=20 > IESG, but I don't think that the remaining issues justify a=20 > face-to-face meeting. >=20 > I also support the idea that Kaj Tesink's draft should be completed=20 > and published, but it is not in-charter for this group and I am not=20 > prepared to take on new charter items at this time. Folks who want=20 > to work on this should talk to Kaj and/or Bert Wijnen and decide how=20 > to move it forward. Perhaps an individual submission would make the=20 > most sense given that it is a short/simple MIB? >=20 > Margaret >=20 >=20 > At 3:24 PM -0400 6/17/04, Margaret Wasserman wrote: > >Hi All, > > > >We should decide soon whether or not the Entity MIB WG will meet in=20 > >San Diego. Thoughts? > > > >If we do meet, what are the likely agenda items? > > > >Margaret > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Entmib mailing list > >Entmib@ietf.org > >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Entmib mailing list > Entmib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib >=20 _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 19 13:51:32 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA10871 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:51:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmcBK-0000LQ-ML; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:44:06 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmc1x-0007IP-Th for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:34:25 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA09235 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:34:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmc1w-0001X6-S6 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:34:24 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmc19-0001DX-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:33:35 -0400 Received: from mail.pedestalnetworks.com ([12.177.67.10] helo=YORKTOWN.pedestalnetworks.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmc07-0000ra-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:32:31 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 10:32:31 -0700 Message-ID: <93401232EABAAB4EA430E13ECC701CCF63ACA9@yorktown.pedestalnetworks.com> Thread-Topic: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? thread-index: AcRtsKK+XeXj36j6QM6Qo5l+u3PL2QAAZtwwAAEEgGA= From: "Faye Ly" To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , "Margaret Wasserman" , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I concur. I think we should move this MIB forward or get it done. -faye -----Original Message----- From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 10:10 AM To: Margaret Wasserman; entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Margaret, I do not have a strong objection to Entity MIB WG not meeting in San Diego. I would like however to see the 'Entity MIB Extensions for manufacturing date and physical module identification' a.k.a 'Kaj's draft' being continued and worked out as a standards track document. What are the reasons that you are not prepared to take this charter item, which seems to have received a fair amount of interest? I believe this is relative small amount of work, and possibly Kaj can complete it in one or two rounds if we do not philosophize too much around it. I volunteered to be a reviewer. There may be no need for meetings.=20 Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Margaret Wasserman > Sent: 19 July, 2004 7:10 PM > To: entmib@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? >=20 >=20 >=20 > Hi again, >=20 > Just so that everyone knows, I have _not_ requested an Entity MIB > meeting for San Diego. If you have any strong objection to this=20 > decision, please let me know before 5pm EST today. >=20 > We do need to finish the Entity State MIB and get it submitted to the > IESG, but I don't think that the remaining issues justify a=20 > face-to-face meeting. >=20 > I also support the idea that Kaj Tesink's draft should be completed > and published, but it is not in-charter for this group and I am not=20 > prepared to take on new charter items at this time. Folks who want=20 > to work on this should talk to Kaj and/or Bert Wijnen and decide how=20 > to move it forward. Perhaps an individual submission would make the=20 > most sense given that it is a short/simple MIB? >=20 > Margaret >=20 >=20 > At 3:24 PM -0400 6/17/04, Margaret Wasserman wrote: > >Hi All, > > > >We should decide soon whether or not the Entity MIB WG will meet in > >San Diego. Thoughts? > > > >If we do meet, what are the likely agenda items? > > > >Margaret > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Entmib mailing list > >Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Entmib mailing list > Entmib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib >=20 _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 19 14:29:57 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA13808 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:29:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmcjm-0004v4-TM; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:19:42 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmccg-00044N-SX for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:12:23 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA12579 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:12:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmccf-00051D-It for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:12:21 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmcbg-0004hv-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:11:21 -0400 Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net ([204.127.202.56]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmcad-00047A-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:10:15 -0400 Received: from djyxpy41 (h00104b8ce2a3.ne.client2.attbi.com[24.128.104.220]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id <2004071918094501200fs644e>; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 18:09:45 +0000 From: "David B Harrington" To: "'Faye Ly'" , "'Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)'" , "'Margaret Wasserman'" , Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:09:47 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Thread-Index: AcRtsKK+XeXj36j6QM6Qo5l+u3PL2QAAZtwwAAEEgGAAAMksoA== In-Reply-To: <93401232EABAAB4EA430E13ECC701CCF63ACA9@yorktown.pedestalnetworks.com> Message-Id: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: ietfdbh@comcast.net List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, In Minneapolis, it was decided that this could not become a WG item unless progress was made on existing WG items. Are we ready to move the State mib forward, or should we drop it? What remains to be done before submitting this to the IESG? If work has not progressed, then the State MIB should be killed, as per agreement reached in Minneapolis (is anybody implementing this mib?). If the WG does still want the State mib to advance, then maybe the WG should meet and hammer out the final draft so it can stop being a bottleneck. Not having a meeting doesn't help get the work done. I support accepting the manufacturing date mib as a WG item as well, after resolving the State MIB progress, and the WG could discuss any needed changes to the details of this mib to make it acceptable as a WG item if there was a WG meeting. An interim meeting might be better for focused work, but I suspect that without a regular meeting an interim meeting won't be permitted. So I recommend that there be a **working** group meeting in San Diego to make some real progress on these two mibs. dbh -----Original Message----- From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Faye Ly Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 1:33 PM To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Margaret Wasserman; entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? I concur. I think we should move this MIB forward or get it done. -faye -----Original Message----- From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 10:10 AM To: Margaret Wasserman; entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Margaret, I do not have a strong objection to Entity MIB WG not meeting in San Diego. I would like however to see the 'Entity MIB Extensions for manufacturing date and physical module identification' a.k.a 'Kaj's draft' being continued and worked out as a standards track document. What are the reasons that you are not prepared to take this charter item, which seems to have received a fair amount of interest? I believe this is relative small amount of work, and possibly Kaj can complete it in one or two rounds if we do not philosophize too much around it. I volunteered to be a reviewer. There may be no need for meetings. Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org > [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Margaret Wasserman > Sent: 19 July, 2004 7:10 PM > To: entmib@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? > > > > Hi again, > > Just so that everyone knows, I have _not_ requested an Entity MIB > meeting for San Diego. If you have any strong objection to this > decision, please let me know before 5pm EST today. > > We do need to finish the Entity State MIB and get it submitted to the > IESG, but I don't think that the remaining issues justify a > face-to-face meeting. > > I also support the idea that Kaj Tesink's draft should be completed > and published, but it is not in-charter for this group and I am not > prepared to take on new charter items at this time. Folks who want > to work on this should talk to Kaj and/or Bert Wijnen and decide how > to move it forward. Perhaps an individual submission would make the > most sense given that it is a short/simple MIB? > > Margaret > > > At 3:24 PM -0400 6/17/04, Margaret Wasserman wrote: > >Hi All, > > > >We should decide soon whether or not the Entity MIB WG will meet in > >San Diego. Thoughts? > > > >If we do meet, what are the likely agenda items? > > > >Margaret > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Entmib mailing list > >Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > > > _______________________________________________ > Entmib mailing list > Entmib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 19 14:44:38 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA15132 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:44:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmcxk-0006tW-Gc; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:34:08 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmcux-0006H0-U0 for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:31:15 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA13944 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:31:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmcuw-0002Y4-Lw for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:31:14 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmctz-0002Hk-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:30:16 -0400 Received: from mail.pedestalnetworks.com ([12.177.67.10] helo=YORKTOWN.pedestalnetworks.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmct6-000222-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:29:20 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 Content-Class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 11:29:20 -0700 Message-ID: <93401232EABAAB4EA430E13ECC701CCF9FCC61@yorktown.pedestalnetworks.com> Thread-Topic: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? thread-index: AcRtsKK+XeXj36j6QM6Qo5l+u3PL2QAAZtwwAAEEgGAAAMksoAAA2m7g From: "Faye Ly" To: , "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , "Margaret Wasserman" , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable David, I am not sure if any progress needs to be made per Kaj's email on 6/17: >Dan, thanks for your review offer! >My understanding of the status and issues is the following: >1. document title is too vague > Can be fixed in several ways; several alternatives > were posted; seems fixable. >2. opaque object is cumbersome to implement > Dave P. was going to write a URN based proposal; > once there's consensus it can easily be inserted >3. acceptance as work item > There have been several expressions of support, but not yet > formal acceptance as a work item, and related WG charter > extension Given that Dave is the one that raised issue for 2 and have not provided any proposal yet. I think we can easily solve 1 and move this draft forward. Dave?? -faye -----Original Message----- From: David B Harrington [mailto:ietfdbh@comcast.net]=20 Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 11:10 AM To: Faye Ly; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; 'Margaret Wasserman'; entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Hi, In Minneapolis, it was decided that this could not become a WG item unless progress was made on existing WG items. Are we ready to move the State mib forward, or should we drop it? What remains to be done before submitting this to the IESG? If work has not progressed, then the State MIB should be killed, as per agreement reached in Minneapolis (is anybody implementing this mib?).=20 If the WG does still want the State mib to advance, then maybe the WG should meet and hammer out the final draft so it can stop being a bottleneck. Not having a meeting doesn't help get the work done. I support accepting the manufacturing date mib as a WG item as well, after resolving the State MIB progress, and the WG could discuss any needed changes to the details of this mib to make it acceptable as a WG item if there was a WG meeting. An interim meeting might be better for focused work, but I suspect that without a regular meeting an interim meeting won't be permitted. So I recommend that there be a **working** group meeting in San Diego to make some real progress on these two mibs.=20 dbh -----Original Message----- From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Faye Ly Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 1:33 PM To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Margaret Wasserman; entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? I concur. I think we should move this MIB forward or get it done. -faye -----Original Message----- From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 10:10 AM To: Margaret Wasserman; entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Margaret, I do not have a strong objection to Entity MIB WG not meeting in San Diego. I would like however to see the 'Entity MIB Extensions for manufacturing date and physical module identification' a.k.a 'Kaj's draft' being continued and worked out as a standards track document. What are the reasons that you are not prepared to take this charter item, which seems to have received a fair amount of interest? I believe this is relative small amount of work, and possibly Kaj can complete it in one or two rounds if we do not philosophize too much around it. I volunteered to be a reviewer. There may be no need for meetings.=20 Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org]On=20 > Behalf Of Margaret Wasserman > Sent: 19 July, 2004 7:10 PM > To: entmib@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? >=20 >=20 >=20 > Hi again, >=20 > Just so that everyone knows, I have _not_ requested an Entity MIB=20 > meeting for San Diego. If you have any strong objection to this=20 > decision, please let me know before 5pm EST today. >=20 > We do need to finish the Entity State MIB and get it submitted to the=20 > IESG, but I don't think that the remaining issues justify a=20 > face-to-face meeting. >=20 > I also support the idea that Kaj Tesink's draft should be completed=20 > and published, but it is not in-charter for this group and I am not=20 > prepared to take on new charter items at this time. Folks who want to > work on this should talk to Kaj and/or Bert Wijnen and decide how to=20 > move it forward. Perhaps an individual submission would make the most > sense given that it is a short/simple MIB? >=20 > Margaret >=20 >=20 > At 3:24 PM -0400 6/17/04, Margaret Wasserman wrote: > >Hi All, > > > >We should decide soon whether or not the Entity MIB WG will meet in=20 > >San Diego. Thoughts? > > > >If we do meet, what are the likely agenda items? > > > >Margaret > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Entmib mailing list > >Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Entmib mailing list > Entmib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib >=20 _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 19 15:00:22 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA16248 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:00:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmdKc-00020j-1r; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:57:46 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmdAS-0000V4-RY for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:47:16 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA15324 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:47:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org ([132.151.6.1] helo=ietf-mx) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmdAR-0007UN-MD for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:47:15 -0400 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmd9R-0007Ah-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:46:14 -0400 Received: from zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.157]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Bmd8N-0006cZ-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:45:07 -0400 Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69]) by zcars0m9.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id i6JIia826855 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:44:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:44:36 -0400 Message-ID: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4CA1C33@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> From: "Sharon Chisholm" To: entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 14:44:32 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org hi An update to the Entity State MIB was submitted this morning. I need to go through the open issues and ensure that they can all be closed based on what was agreed and the changes that were made. I'll do that math and get back to you. I have no objection to meeting. It might be a light agenda though. Will the editor of the work be present? Sharon -----Original Message----- From: David B Harrington [mailto:ietfdbh@comcast.net] Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 2:10 PM To: 'Faye Ly'; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; 'Margaret Wasserman'; entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Hi, In Minneapolis, it was decided that this could not become a WG item unless progress was made on existing WG items. Are we ready to move the State mib forward, or should we drop it? What remains to be done before submitting this to the IESG? If work has not progressed, then the State MIB should be killed, as per agreement reached in Minneapolis (is anybody implementing this mib?). If the WG does still want the State mib to advance, then maybe the WG should meet and hammer out the final draft so it can stop being a bottleneck. Not having a meeting doesn't help get the work done. I support accepting the manufacturing date mib as a WG item as well, after resolving the State MIB progress, and the WG could discuss any needed changes to the details of this mib to make it acceptable as a WG item if there was a WG meeting. An interim meeting might be better for focused work, but I suspect that without a regular meeting an interim meeting won't be permitted. So I recommend that there be a **working** group meeting in San Diego to make some real progress on these two mibs. dbh -----Original Message----- From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Faye Ly Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 1:33 PM To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Margaret Wasserman; entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? I concur. I think we should move this MIB forward or get it done. -faye -----Original Message----- From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan) Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 10:10 AM To: Margaret Wasserman; entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Margaret, I do not have a strong objection to Entity MIB WG not meeting in San Diego. I would like however to see the 'Entity MIB Extensions for manufacturing date and physical module identification' a.k.a 'Kaj's draft' being continued and worked out as a standards track document. What are the reasons that you are not prepared to take this charter item, which seems to have received a fair amount of interest? I believe this is relative small amount of work, and possibly Kaj can complete it in one or two rounds if we do not philosophize too much around it. I volunteered to be a reviewer. There may be no need for meetings. Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org]On > Behalf Of Margaret Wasserman > Sent: 19 July, 2004 7:10 PM > To: entmib@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? > > > > Hi again, > > Just so that everyone knows, I have _not_ requested an Entity MIB > meeting for San Diego. If you have any strong objection to this > decision, please let me know before 5pm EST today. > > We do need to finish the Entity State MIB and get it submitted to the > IESG, but I don't think that the remaining issues justify a > face-to-face meeting. > > I also support the idea that Kaj Tesink's draft should be completed > and published, but it is not in-charter for this group and I am not > prepared to take on new charter items at this time. Folks who want to > work on this should talk to Kaj and/or Bert Wijnen and decide how to > move it forward. Perhaps an individual submission would make the most > sense given that it is a short/simple MIB? > > Margaret > > > At 3:24 PM -0400 6/17/04, Margaret Wasserman wrote: > >Hi All, > > > >We should decide soon whether or not the Entity MIB WG will meet in > >San Diego. Thoughts? > > > >If we do meet, what are the likely agenda items? > > > >Margaret > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Entmib mailing list > >Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > > > _______________________________________________ > Entmib mailing list > Entmib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 19 19:45:24 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA09088 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:45:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmhHw-0003gs-1G; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:11:16 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmeVE-0006s2-Bj for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:12:48 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA20645 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:12:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shell4.bayarea.net ([209.128.82.1]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BmeVA-00010A-Uv for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:12:48 -0400 Received: from NB5.dsperkins.com (shell4.bayarea.net [209.128.82.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by shell4.bayarea.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i6JKCeGB011530; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:12:40 -0700 Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20040719130940.0245bb60@127.0.0.1> X-Sender: dperkins@127.0.0.1 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9 Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 13:12:02 -0700 To: "Faye Ly" , "Margaret Wasserman" , From: "David T. Perkins" Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? In-Reply-To: <93401232EABAAB4EA430E13ECC701CCF9FCC61@yorktown.pedestalne tworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0cff8c3ec906d056784362c06f5f88c1 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org HI, Dave has new job at Trapeze Networks, a wireless startup. Very busy. Good and Bad. Dave needs to make time to crank out short I-D. Sorry, /david t. perkins At 11:29 AM 7/19/2004 -0700, Faye Ly wrote: >David, > >I am not sure if any progress needs to be made per Kaj's email on 6/17: > >>Dan, thanks for your review offer! >>My understanding of the status and issues is the following: >>1. document title is too vague >> Can be fixed in several ways; several alternatives >> were posted; seems fixable. >>2. opaque object is cumbersome to implement >> Dave P. was going to write a URN based proposal; >> once there's consensus it can easily be inserted >>3. acceptance as work item >> There have been several expressions of support, but not yet >> formal acceptance as a work item, and related WG charter >> extension > >Given that Dave is the one that raised issue for 2 and have not provided >any proposal yet. I think we can easily solve 1 and move this draft >forward. Dave?? > >-faye > >-----Original Message----- >From: David B Harrington [mailto:ietfdbh@comcast.net] >Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 11:10 AM >To: Faye Ly; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; 'Margaret Wasserman'; >entmib@ietf.org >Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? > > >Hi, > >In Minneapolis, it was decided that this could not become a WG item >unless progress was made on existing WG items. Are we ready to move the >State mib forward, or should we drop it? What remains to be done before >submitting this to the IESG? > >If work has not progressed, then the State MIB should be killed, as per >agreement reached in Minneapolis (is anybody implementing this mib?). > >If the WG does still want the State mib to advance, then maybe the WG >should meet and hammer out the final draft so it can stop being a >bottleneck. Not having a meeting doesn't help get the work done. > >I support accepting the manufacturing date mib as a WG item as well, >after resolving the State MIB progress, and the WG could discuss any >needed changes to the details of this mib to make it acceptable as a WG >item if there was a WG meeting. > >An interim meeting might be better for focused work, but I suspect that >without a regular meeting an interim meeting won't be permitted. > >So I recommend that there be a **working** group meeting in San Diego to >make some real progress on these two mibs. > >dbh > >-----Original Message----- >From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf >Of Faye Ly >Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 1:33 PM >To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Margaret Wasserman; entmib@ietf.org >Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? > >I concur. I think we should move this MIB forward or get it done. -faye > >-----Original Message----- >From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf >Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan) >Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 10:10 AM >To: Margaret Wasserman; entmib@ietf.org >Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? > > >Margaret, > >I do not have a strong objection to Entity MIB WG not meeting in San >Diego. > >I would like however to see the 'Entity MIB Extensions for manufacturing >date and physical module identification' a.k.a 'Kaj's draft' being >continued and worked out as a standards track document. What are the >reasons that you are not prepared to take this charter item, which seems >to have received a fair amount of interest? I believe this is relative >small amount of work, and possibly Kaj can complete it in one or two >rounds if we do not philosophize too much around it. I volunteered to be >a reviewer. There may be no need for meetings. > >Regards, > >Dan > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org]On >> Behalf Of Margaret Wasserman >> Sent: 19 July, 2004 7:10 PM >> To: entmib@ietf.org >> Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? >> >> >> >> Hi again, >> >> Just so that everyone knows, I have _not_ requested an Entity MIB >> meeting for San Diego. If you have any strong objection to this >> decision, please let me know before 5pm EST today. >> >> We do need to finish the Entity State MIB and get it submitted to the >> IESG, but I don't think that the remaining issues justify a >> face-to-face meeting. >> >> I also support the idea that Kaj Tesink's draft should be completed >> and published, but it is not in-charter for this group and I am not >> prepared to take on new charter items at this time. Folks who want to > >> work on this should talk to Kaj and/or Bert Wijnen and decide how to >> move it forward. Perhaps an individual submission would make the most > >> sense given that it is a short/simple MIB? >> >> Margaret >> >> >> At 3:24 PM -0400 6/17/04, Margaret Wasserman wrote: >> >Hi All, >> > >> >We should decide soon whether or not the Entity MIB WG will meet in >> >San Diego. Thoughts? >> > >> >If we do meet, what are the likely agenda items? >> > >> >Margaret >> > >> > >> >_______________________________________________ >> >Entmib mailing list >> >Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Entmib mailing list >> Entmib@ietf.org >> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib >> > >_______________________________________________ >Entmib mailing list >Entmib@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > >_______________________________________________ >Entmib mailing list >Entmib@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > > >_______________________________________________ >Entmib mailing list >Entmib@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 19 19:45:25 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA09083 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:45:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmhHt-0003ei-PA; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:11:13 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmeUm-0006oK-IB for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:12:20 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA20625 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:12:18 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.thingmagic.com ([207.31.248.245] helo=thingmagic.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BmeUm-0000zl-CX for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:12:20 -0400 Received: from [207.31.248.169] (account margaret HELO [10.0.0.78]) by thingmagic.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP-TLS id 114700 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:09:36 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: margaret@mail.thingmagic.com Message-Id: Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:12:04 -0400 To: entmib@ietf.org From: Margaret Wasserman Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17 Subject: [Entmib] Agenda for Entity MIB (entmib) X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Here is a draft agenda for San Diego. Please let me know if you see any errors or omissions. I don't think that the -04 version of the Entity State MIB has been posted yet, but it should be available shortly. Kaj, will you be in San Diego to present your work? Has there been any update since the -00 version? Thanks, Margaret --- Entity MIB (entmib) WG Agenda IETF 60, San Diego, CA ========================= - Introduction and Agenda Bashing (5 min) - Wrapping up the Entity State MIB -- Sharon Chisholm (15 min) http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-entmib-state-04.txt GOALS: Close all open issues and ship it! - Definitions of Supplemental Entity Managed Objects -- Kaj Tesink (20 min) http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-tesink-entity-supplmib-00.txt GOALS: Technical review & decision about how/if to move forward - Future of the WG -- Margaret Wasserman (15 min) GOALS: Determine whether a WG recharter is needed - Wrap-up & Action Items (5 min) _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 19 19:46:12 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA09395 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:46:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmhLm-0007oo-Ti; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:15:14 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmet2-0006t3-HH for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:37:24 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA26083 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:37:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from thumper.research.telcordia.com ([128.96.41.1]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bmesu-0002IK-1S for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:37:24 -0400 Received: from shannon.research.telcordia.com (shannon-83.research.telcordia.com [128.96.83.11]) by thumper.research.telcordia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i6JKad9C004622; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:36:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from kaj-100.research.telcordia.com (kaj-100.cc.telcordia.com [128.96.171.145]) by shannon.research.telcordia.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA27764; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:36:38 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20040719162902.0179f8c0@128.96.81.11> X-Sender: kaj@128.96.81.11 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:36:47 -0400 To: "Sharon Chisholm" , entmib@ietf.org From: Kaj Tesink Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? In-Reply-To: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4CA1C33@zcarhxm2.corp.norte l.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-RAVMilter-Version: 8.4.2(snapshot 20021217) (thumper) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 86f85b2f88b0d50615aed44a7f9e33c7 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org At 02:44 PM 7/19/2004 -0400, Sharon Chisholm wrote: >hi > >An update to the Entity State MIB was submitted this morning. I need to go >through the open issues and ensure that they can all be closed based on what >was agreed and the changes that were made. I'll do that math and get back to >you. > >I have no objection to meeting. It might be a light agenda though. Will the >editor of the work be present? i cannot be present, but can check whether another telcordia person can attend. as far as the draft is concerned, we're talking actually only about two objects, of which only one is under debate. dave p. had volunteered a fix, so that could be something to discuss (URN approach). i'm personally rather flexible wrt the solution so if either the meeting or an adhoc group can coble up something we can put it in the draft and be done. wrt the charter, perhaps bert can give some guidance here. i suppose we dont need a meeting for that but i may be wrong. the draft has been out there for a while and there have not been proposals for additional functions, so the scope of the requested work is rather clear. and with dan's offer as reviewer we have a straightforward path to wrapup. kaj >Sharon > >-----Original Message----- >From: David B Harrington [mailto:ietfdbh@comcast.net] >Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 2:10 PM >To: 'Faye Ly'; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; 'Margaret Wasserman'; entmib@ietf.org >Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? > > >Hi, > >In Minneapolis, it was decided that this could not become a WG item unless >progress was made on existing WG items. Are we ready to move the State mib >forward, or should we drop it? What remains to be done before submitting >this to the IESG? > >If work has not progressed, then the State MIB should be killed, as per >agreement reached in Minneapolis (is anybody implementing this mib?). > >If the WG does still want the State mib to advance, then maybe the WG should >meet and hammer out the final draft so it can stop being a bottleneck. Not >having a meeting doesn't help get the work done. > >I support accepting the manufacturing date mib as a WG item as well, after >resolving the State MIB progress, and the WG could discuss any needed >changes to the details of this mib to make it acceptable as a WG item if >there was a WG meeting. > >An interim meeting might be better for focused work, but I suspect that >without a regular meeting an interim meeting won't be permitted. > >So I recommend that there be a **working** group meeting in San Diego to >make some real progress on these two mibs. > >dbh > >-----Original Message----- >From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >Faye Ly >Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 1:33 PM >To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Margaret Wasserman; entmib@ietf.org >Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? > >I concur. I think we should move this MIB forward or get it done. -faye > >-----Original Message----- >From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >Romascanu, Dan (Dan) >Sent: Monday, July 19, 2004 10:10 AM >To: Margaret Wasserman; entmib@ietf.org >Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? > > >Margaret, > >I do not have a strong objection to Entity MIB WG not meeting in San Diego. > >I would like however to see the 'Entity MIB Extensions for manufacturing >date and physical module identification' a.k.a 'Kaj's draft' being continued >and worked out as a standards track document. What are the reasons that you >are not prepared to take this charter item, which seems to have received a >fair amount of interest? I believe this is relative small amount of work, >and possibly Kaj can complete it in one or two rounds if we do not >philosophize too much around it. I volunteered to be a reviewer. There may >be no need for meetings. > >Regards, > >Dan > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org]On > > Behalf Of Margaret Wasserman > > Sent: 19 July, 2004 7:10 PM > > To: entmib@ietf.org > > Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? > > > > > > > > Hi again, > > > > Just so that everyone knows, I have _not_ requested an Entity MIB > > meeting for San Diego. If you have any strong objection to this > > decision, please let me know before 5pm EST today. > > > > We do need to finish the Entity State MIB and get it submitted to the > > IESG, but I don't think that the remaining issues justify a > > face-to-face meeting. > > > > I also support the idea that Kaj Tesink's draft should be completed > > and published, but it is not in-charter for this group and I am not > > prepared to take on new charter items at this time. Folks who want to > > work on this should talk to Kaj and/or Bert Wijnen and decide how to > > move it forward. Perhaps an individual submission would make the most > > sense given that it is a short/simple MIB? > > > > Margaret > > > > > > At 3:24 PM -0400 6/17/04, Margaret Wasserman wrote: > > >Hi All, > > > > > >We should decide soon whether or not the Entity MIB WG will meet in > > >San Diego. Thoughts? > > > > > >If we do meet, what are the likely agenda items? > > > > > >Margaret > > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >Entmib mailing list > > >Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Entmib mailing list > > Entmib@ietf.org > > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > > > >_______________________________________________ >Entmib mailing list >Entmib@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > >_______________________________________________ >Entmib mailing list >Entmib@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > > >_______________________________________________ >Entmib mailing list >Entmib@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > >_______________________________________________ >Entmib mailing list >Entmib@ietf.org >https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Kaj Tesink Telcordia Technologies. Inc. 331 Newman Springs Road Red Bank, NJ 07701 Email: kaj@research.telcordia.com Tel: (732) 758-5254 Fax: (732) 758-4177 _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 19 19:50:32 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA10238 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:50:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmhNd-0002vb-0L; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:17:09 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmf1G-0002u4-Jn for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:45:54 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA01430 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:45:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from host50.foretec.com ([65.246.255.50] helo=mx2.foretec.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BmeyQ-0002qs-0a for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:43:00 -0400 Received: from mail.thingmagic.com ([207.31.248.245] helo=thingmagic.com) by mx2.foretec.com with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1Bmdqi-0001kG-Dz for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:30:56 -0400 Received: from [207.31.248.169] (account margaret HELO [10.0.0.78]) by thingmagic.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP-TLS id 114664 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:28:14 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: margaret@mail.thingmagic.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4CA1C33@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> References: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4CA1C33@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 15:28:55 -0400 To: entmib@ietf.org From: Margaret Wasserman Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Okay. Having seen enough interest today to think that a meeting in San Diego is warranted, I will schedule one. I'll ask for an hour, and our agenda items will be: - Wrapping up the Entity State MIB -- Sharon GOALS: Close all open issues and ship it! - Status of the "Definitions of Supplemental Entity Managed Objects" draft GOALS: Technical review & decision about how/if to move forward - Future of the WG GOALS: Determine whether the WG should continue to exist We can also discuss the last call issues with the Entity MIB, if any. See you all in San Diego! Margaret _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Mon Jul 19 20:01:02 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA12029 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 20:01:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmhd6-0000M3-FM; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 19:33:08 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmfyK-0007LT-Hw for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 17:46:56 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA13871 for ; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 17:46:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from g48bf.g.pppool.de ([80.185.72.191] helo=james.eecs.iu-bremen.de) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BmfyJ-00079X-Vx for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 17:46:57 -0400 Received: by james.eecs.iu-bremen.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 5F32C81D4; Mon, 19 Jul 2004 23:46:51 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 23:46:50 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Faye Ly Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Message-ID: <20040719214650.GA2697@iu-bremen.de> Mail-Followup-To: Faye Ly , ietfdbh@comcast.net, "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , Margaret Wasserman , entmib@ietf.org References: <93401232EABAAB4EA430E13ECC701CCF9FCC61@yorktown.pedestalnetworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <93401232EABAAB4EA430E13ECC701CCF9FCC61@yorktown.pedestalnetworks.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Cc: Margaret Wasserman , "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" , ietfdbh@comcast.net, entmib@ietf.org X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 11:29:20AM -0700, Faye Ly wrote: > >2. opaque object is cumbersome to implement > > Dave P. was going to write a URN based proposal; > > once there's consensus it can easily be inserted The proposal was to use a URI instead of an opaque object. This would require to register a URN namespace for the CLEI codes, which I think must be done by someone from Telcordia. In other words, the MIB definition just becomes simpler since the description just says the object (I forgot the name) contains a URI/URN. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 20 04:19:41 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA29348 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 04:19:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmpji-0003tz-F6; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 04:12:30 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmpcY-0002Jy-RX for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 04:05:07 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id EAA28434 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 04:05:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from g44d3.g.pppool.de ([80.185.68.211] helo=james.eecs.iu-bremen.de) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bmpca-00048g-CU for entmib@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 04:05:09 -0400 Received: by james.eecs.iu-bremen.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1C87981D4; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 10:04:57 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 10:04:57 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Kaj Tesink Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Message-ID: <20040720080457.GA1822@iu-bremen.de> Mail-Followup-To: Kaj Tesink , entmib@ietf.org References: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4CA1C33@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20040719162902.0179f8c0@128.96.81.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20040719162902.0179f8c0@128.96.81.11> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 538aad3a3c4f01d8b6a6477ca4248793 Cc: entmib@ietf.org X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 04:36:47PM -0400, Kaj Tesink wrote: > > i cannot be present, but can check whether another telcordia person can > attend. > as far as the draft is concerned, we're talking actually only about two > objects, > of which only one is under debate. dave p. had volunteered a fix, so that > could > be something to discuss (URN approach). i'm personally rather flexible wrt > the > solution so if either the meeting or an adhoc group can coble up something > we can put it in the draft and be done. I think the changes on the MIB side are rather straight forward. Below is a first cut an proposed new text: 3.2. entSupplPhysicalUris This object provides additional identification information about the physical entity. This object may be used to encode for example a URI containing a Common Language Equipment Identifier (CLEI) URI [XXX] for the managed physical entity. If no additional identification information is known or supported about the physical entity the object is not instantiated. And in the MIB definition itself: entSupplPhysicalUris OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX DisplayString MAX-ACCESS read-write STATUS current DESCRIPTION "This object contains additional identification information about the physical entity. The object contains URIs and therefore the syntax of this object must conform to RFC 2396 section 2. Multiple URIs may be separated by white space characters." ::= { entSupplPhysicalEntry 2 } The definition of the cleiCode OBJECT-IDENTITY will be removed and someone from Telcordia needs to write up a document registering a URN namespace for CLEI codes. Note that [XXX] would refer to a most likely informational RFC which registers a URN namespace for CLEI codes. /js P.S. I will not attend the meeting in San Diego. -- Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 20 05:50:17 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA04219 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 05:50:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmr9x-0002q2-T7; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 05:43:41 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmr91-0002Rr-HC for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 05:42:43 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA03864 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 05:42:41 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com ([198.152.12.100]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bmr97-0005D1-JO for entmib@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 05:42:50 -0400 Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id i6K9fCeq012689 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 05:41:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from IS0004AVEXU1.global.avaya.com (h135-64-105-51.avaya.com [135.64.105.51]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id i6K9fAeq012614 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 05:41:11 -0400 (EDT) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:42:33 +0300 Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Thread-Index: AcRuMmal+9kEb2+2Sra3JFmbQvO4LgACkehw From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" To: , "Kaj Tesink" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: a87a9cdae4ac5d3fbeee75cd0026d632 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: entmib@ietf.org X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Juergen, A few questions: 1. Should the language about using the CLEI codes be more decisive? = SHOULD instead of MAY? For example: 'If CLEI codes are supported in the = operational environment where this agent is implemented, this object = SHOULD include a URI containing a Common Language Equipment Identifier = (CLEI) URI [XXX] for the managed physical entity.' 2.' If no additional identification information is known or supported = about the physical entity the object is not instantiated' - This object = has a MAX-ACCESS read-write. How would the creation or deletion of the = first URI in the list work? Would not it be simpler to use a zero-length = string for the case when no identification information is known? 3. 'Note that [XXX] would refer to a most likely informational RFC which = registers a URN namespace for CLEI codes.' - Does [XXX] really need to = be an Informational RFC? I am afraid that this would hang this MIB until = that RFC goes through our wonderful IETF process. Maybe the Telcordia = folks already have a document to be referenced as an Informative = Reference, or can create one on a shorter path. =20 Regards, Dan > -----Original Message----- > From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org=20 > [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Juergen Schoenwaelder > Sent: 20 July, 2004 11:05 AM > To: Kaj Tesink > Cc: entmib@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? >=20 >=20 > On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 04:36:47PM -0400, Kaj Tesink wrote: > >=20 > > i cannot be present, but can check whether another=20 > telcordia person can=20 > > attend. > > as far as the draft is concerned, we're talking actually=20 > only about two=20 > > objects, > > of which only one is under debate. dave p. had volunteered=20 > a fix, so that=20 > > could > > be something to discuss (URN approach). i'm personally=20 > rather flexible wrt=20 > > the > > solution so if either the meeting or an adhoc group can=20 > coble up something > > we can put it in the draft and be done. >=20 > I think the changes on the MIB side are rather straight forward. Below > is a first cut an proposed new text: >=20 > 3.2. entSupplPhysicalUris >=20 > This object provides additional identification information=20 > about the=20 > physical entity. This object may be used to encode for example a=20 > URI containing a Common Language Equipment Identifier (CLEI) URI > [XXX] for the managed physical entity. If no additional=20 > identification=20 > information is known or supported about the physical=20 > entity the object=20 > is not instantiated. >=20 > And in the MIB definition itself: >=20 > entSupplPhysicalUris OBJECT-TYPE > SYNTAX DisplayString > MAX-ACCESS read-write > STATUS current > DESCRIPTION > "This object contains additional identification information=20 > about the physical entity. The object contains URIs and > therefore the syntax of this object must conform to RFC > 2396 section 2. Multiple URIs may be separated by white=20 > space characters." > ::=3D { entSupplPhysicalEntry 2 } >=20 > The definition of the cleiCode OBJECT-IDENTITY will be removed and > someone from Telcordia needs to write up a document registering a > URN namespace for CLEI codes.=20 >=20 > Note that [XXX] would refer to a most likely informational RFC which > registers a URN namespace for CLEI codes. >=20 > /js >=20 > P.S. I will not attend the meeting in San Diego.=20 >=20 > --=20 > Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen > P.O. Box 750 561,=20 > 28725 Bremen, Germany >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Entmib mailing list > Entmib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib >=20 _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 20 06:18:40 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA05730 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:18:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmrff-0006Li-Ji; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:16:27 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmrWK-000066-QH for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:06:48 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA05044 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:06:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from g5743.g.pppool.de ([80.185.87.67] helo=james.eecs.iu-bremen.de) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BmrWO-0005RX-Hf for entmib@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:06:56 -0400 Received: by james.eecs.iu-bremen.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A39D081D4; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:06:40 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:06:40 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Message-ID: <20040720100640.GA1898@iu-bremen.de> Mail-Followup-To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" , Kaj Tesink , entmib@ietf.org References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa Cc: entmib@ietf.org, Kaj Tesink X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 12:42:33PM +0300, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: > 1. Should the language about using the CLEI codes be more decisive? > SHOULD instead of MAY? For example: 'If CLEI codes are supported in > the operational environment where this agent is implemented, this > object SHOULD include a URI containing a Common Language Equipment > Identifier (CLEI) URI [XXX] for the managed physical entity.' I guess we should leave that to the decision of the implementator (or whoever configures this object). If we add more decisive text, we might again have a debate whether the IETF features proprietary identification mechanisms. > 2.' If no additional identification information is known or supported > about the physical entity the object is not instantiated' - This object > has a MAX-ACCESS read-write. How would the creation or deletion of the > first URI in the list work? Would not it be simpler to use a zero-length > string for the case when no identification information is known? I just kept this sentence from the original text. I don't mind allowing a zero-length string instead. > 3. 'Note that [XXX] would refer to a most likely informational RFC which > registers a URN namespace for CLEI codes.' - Does [XXX] really need to > be an Informational RFC? I am afraid that this would hang this MIB until > that RFC goes through our wonderful IETF process. Maybe the Telcordia > folks already have a document to be referenced as an Informative > Reference, or can create one on a shorter path. This MIB has already been hanging around for quite some time. While it is popular to point to the slow IETF process, I believe that in many cases the speed in which a reasonable document is written does contribute quite a bit to the overall speed. I do have a strong preference to have a URN namespace formally registered and all this documented by an RFC. I do not think it is a complicated thing to do - especially if someone from Telcoridia who knows how these CLEI codes work writes this up. There are enough template RFCs out there. There is no reason why such a document should not be ready to go to the RFC editor as an individual submission directly after the next WG meeting. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 20 06:19:50 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA05804 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:19:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmrff-0006Lp-Oh; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:16:27 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmrWR-00006A-2A for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:06:55 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA05051 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:06:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ihemail2.lucent.com ([192.11.222.163]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BmrWU-0005R5-VH for entmib@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 06:07:02 -0400 Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by ihemail2.lucent.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i6KA6FTv027995 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 05:06:16 -0500 (CDT) Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:06:15 +0200 Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06794@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" To: Margaret Wasserman , entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 12:06:15 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org > Okay. > > Having seen enough interest today to think that a meeting in San > Diego is warranted, I will schedule one. > > I'll ask for an hour, and our agenda items will be: > > - Wrapping up the Entity State MIB -- Sharon > GOALS: Close all open issues and ship it! > > - Status of the "Definitions of Supplemental Entity Managed > Objects" draft > GOALS: Technical review & decision about how/if to > move forward > I'd reather change "Technical review" into something aka "Come to resolution about the one oustanding issue." This debate has been going on for I don't know how long now. We better decide which solution we want. I would URGE everyone who has comments/concerns about a fix/resolution of the issue to SEND their proposal to the mailing list (well) BEFORE the SanDiego meeting, so we can discuss it and try to come to consensus. Bert _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Tue Jul 20 08:58:37 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA16489 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:58:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bmu8v-0002V0-2n; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:54:49 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BmtrV-000562-O2 for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:36:49 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA14923 for ; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:36:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mail.thingmagic.com ([207.31.248.245] helo=thingmagic.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bmtrd-0007gk-B0 for entmib@ietf.org; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:36:58 -0400 Received: from [24.61.30.237] (account margaret HELO [10.0.0.78]) by thingmagic.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP-TLS id 115115; Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:34:00 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: margaret@mail.thingmagic.com Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06794@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> References: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06794@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 08:32:33 -0400 To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" , entmib@ietf.org From: Margaret Wasserman Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 538aad3a3c4f01d8b6a6477ca4248793 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org At 12:06 PM +0200 7/20/04, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: >> - Status of the "Definitions of Supplemental Entity Managed >> Objects" draft >> GOALS: Technical review & decision about how/if to >> move forward >> > >I'd reather change "Technical review" into something aka "Come to >resolution about the one oustanding issue." > >This debate has been going on for I don't know how long now. I agree, and your suggestion sounds reasonable to me. If we can close on the one issue with the draft, Dan Romascanu (who has already volunteered) can do a thorough review and we can get this document published as a sponsored individual submission without the need for a WG re-charter, etc. It's only a couple of objects, after all! >We better decide which solution we want. > >I would URGE everyone who has comments/concerns about a fix/resolution of >the issue to SEND their proposal to the mailing list (well) BEFORE the >SanDiego meeting, so we can discuss it and try to come to consensus. I'll make the same plea for any remaining issues with the Entity State MIB. Personally, I hope that we will leave San Diego with either: (1) A set of well-defined edits that are required before we send the Entity State MIB to the IESG. OR (2) A decision not to proceed with the Entity State MIB at all. We've spent _far_ to long nibbling at this MIB, and we should either ship it or kill it, IMO. As I think I've said on this list before, it is heavily frowned upon for an IESG member to chair a regular WG, and I only continued as chair because we were supposed to finish in a few months. That was over a year ago! No one else has volunteered to run the group, and (as a working group, not as individual people) I think we are suffering classic signs of having outlived our own usefulness. So let's finish up (one way or the other) and close down. Thanks, Margaret _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Wed Jul 21 16:35:42 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA26014 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 16:35:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BnMxy-0006qN-Om; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:41:26 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BnMnm-000391-Rj; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:30:54 -0400 Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA16302; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:30:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200407211930.PAA16302@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 15:30:52 -0400 Cc: entmib@ietf.org Subject: [Entmib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-entmib-state-04.txt X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Entity MIB Working Group of the IETF. Title : Entity State MIB Author(s) : S. Chisholm, D. Perkins Filename : draft-ietf-entmib-state-04.txt Pages : 18 Date : 2004-7-21 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes extensions to the entity MIB to provide information about the state of the entity. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-entmib-state-04.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-entmib-state-04.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-entmib-state-04.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2004-7-21152621.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-entmib-state-04.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-entmib-state-04.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2004-7-21152621.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib --NextPart-- From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 22 09:58:16 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA21117 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 09:58:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bndr1-0002c1-Lj; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 09:43:23 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bndgc-00077M-G7 for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 09:32:38 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA19330 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 09:32:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.57]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bndh8-0001PM-GV for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 09:33:13 -0400 Received: from zcard309.ca.nortel.com (zcard309.ca.nortel.com [47.129.242.69]) by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id i6MDW2S20549 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 09:32:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: by zcard309.ca.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 09:32:03 -0400 Message-ID: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4D9EAC6@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> From: "Sharon Chisholm" To: entmib@ietf.org Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 09:31:54 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8b431ad66d60be2d47c7bfeb879db82c Subject: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org hi Ok. I just finished doing the math and while I was able to move a number of the issues to resolved, the following issues had either small portions of the proposed edit that I missed in -04 or had small bits where I want to double check something before closing. 307 'notSupported' is semantically wrong - This has been changed to 'unavailable'. Some people had wanted 'unknown'. Should I have changed this to unknown? 311 DateAndTimeOrZero - Didn't really have proposed resolution or rather we had a couple comments after the proposed resolution 322 Textual Convention Names (Prefix) - I just missed the prefix during the edit. It is in a separate module though. - I will update with an 'Entity' prefix 325 - I thought I made this change, but apparently didn't. I will make it. 333 Relationship with Alarm MIB open entity-state - The open bit of this is whether the Alarm MIB should be a normative or informative reference. I think it's a bit of a grey area so propose leaving it where it is for now. 334 Table, Index Descriptions open entity-state - I think the changes reflect what people were looking for, but I wasn't sure. 354 More Editorial Changes (2) - I'm not sure what is wrong with the term 'reports' so I can't suggest a replacement - We haven't yet discussed this one, but adding X.731 to the Reference clause was a previous editing instruction based either on consensus or a suggestion from the area director - I forget which. I propose keeping it. Sharon Chisholm Portfolio Integration Nortel Networks Ottawa, Canada _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 22 19:09:39 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA27124 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 19:09:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BnmKt-0006wx-0v; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 18:46:47 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BnjpK-0001jy-94 for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:06:02 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA23786 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:06:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.48]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bnjpw-0000Sz-UO for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:06:41 -0400 Received: from h-68-166-38-176.snvacaid.dynamic.covad.net ([68.166.38.176] helo=oemcomputer) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1BnjpI-0005pV-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:06:00 -0700 Message-ID: <006e01c47027$9b138640$7f1afea9@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" To: References: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4D9EAC6@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> Subject: Re: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:08:07 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Hi - > From: "Sharon Chisholm" > To: > Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 6:31 AM > Subject: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status ... > 307 'notSupported' is semantically wrong > - This has been changed to 'unavailable'. Some people had wanted > 'unknown'. Should > I have changed this to unknown? Part of the difficulty in naming this one is that it seems to be doing triple-duty for notApplicable as well as notSupported and notAvailable. It's unclear whether the distinction would actually be useful, so as long as everyone agrees that "unavailable" includes these cases, I'd be happy. > 311 DateAndTimeOrZero > - Didn't really have proposed resolution or rather we had a couple > comments after > the proposed resolution ... Since DateAndTime is already used this way (and has been for a long time) I don't see the value of adding a new TC. However, it might make sense to see if we could agree on an erratum for RFC 2579. Randy _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 22 20:21:30 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA03215 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 20:21:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bnneu-0006WY-Iz; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 20:11:32 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BnnYE-0000zz-Sq for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 20:04:38 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA02268 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 20:04:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from g5895.g.pppool.de ([80.185.88.149] helo=james.eecs.iu-bremen.de) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BnnYq-0002Nv-H2 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 20:05:20 -0400 Received: by james.eecs.iu-bremen.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 978D282DA; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 02:04:31 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 02:04:31 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Randy Presuhn Subject: Re: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status Message-ID: <20040723000431.GE2294@iu-bremen.de> Mail-Followup-To: Randy Presuhn , entmib@ietf.org References: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4D9EAC6@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> <006e01c47027$9b138640$7f1afea9@oemcomputer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <006e01c47027$9b138640$7f1afea9@oemcomputer> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b Cc: entmib@ietf.org X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org On Thu, Jul 22, 2004 at 01:08:07PM -0700, Randy Presuhn wrote: > Part of the difficulty in naming this one is that it seems to be doing > triple-duty for notApplicable as well as notSupported and notAvailable. > It's unclear whether the distinction would actually be useful, so as long > as everyone agrees that "unavailable" includes these cases, I'd be happy. So "unknown" would IMHO be the better choice as it is clearly vague. > > 311 DateAndTimeOrZero > > - Didn't really have proposed resolution or rather we had a couple > > comments after > > the proposed resolution > ... > > Since DateAndTime is already used this way (and has been for a long time) > I don't see the value of adding a new TC. However, it might make sense > to see if we could agree on an erratum for RFC 2579. I agree. See my statement to this effect from Mon, 22 Mar 2004 22:31:31 +0100. If nobody objects, I will submit an errata with the following simple change: OLD: 2 3 month 1..12 3 4 day 1..31 NEW: 2 3 month 0..12 3 4 day 0..31 For those interested: '0000000000000000'H appears 58 times in the set of published IETF MIB modules. So there is some clear evidence that this "zero" value has been used before without introducing a new TC. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 22 22:49:32 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA22918 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 22:49:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bnq06-0002sj-ND; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 22:41:34 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bnpv2-0000dV-0E for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 22:36:20 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA21931 for ; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 22:36:17 -0400 (EDT) Received: from flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.232]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bnpvh-00049b-6R for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 22:37:02 -0400 Received: from h-68-166-37-106.snvacaid.dynamic.covad.net ([68.166.37.106] helo=oemcomputer) by flamingo.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1Bnpuy-0006PU-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 19:36:16 -0700 Message-ID: <003001c4705e$20106a80$7f1afea9@oemcomputer> From: "Randy Presuhn" To: References: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4D9EAC6@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com><006e01c47027$9b138640$7f1afea9@oemcomputer> <20040723000431.GE2294@iu-bremen.de> Subject: Re: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 19:38:23 -0700 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 52e1467c2184c31006318542db5614d5 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Hi - > From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" > To: "Randy Presuhn" > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 5:04 PM > Subject: Re: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status ... > > Since DateAndTime is already used this way (and has been for a long time) > > I don't see the value of adding a new TC. However, it might make sense > > to see if we could agree on an erratum for RFC 2579. > > I agree. See my statement to this effect from Mon, 22 Mar 2004 22:31:31 > +0100. If nobody objects, I will submit an errata with the following > simple change: > > OLD: > 2 3 month 1..12 > 3 4 day 1..31 > > NEW: > 2 3 month 0..12 > 3 4 day 0..31 > > For those interested: '0000000000000000'H appears 58 times in the set > of published IETF MIB modules. So there is some clear evidence that > this "zero" value has been used before without introducing a new TC. ... It might be worthwhile to also add some text that explains that 0 is used in the month and day fields in conjunction with sentinel values, whose exact semantics are specific to usages of the TC. Randy _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Fri Jul 23 05:53:48 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA05728 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 05:53:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bnwh4-00021F-Pb; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 05:50:22 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bnwd3-0000WB-5D for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 05:46:13 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA05383 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 05:46:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com ([192.11.222.161]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bnwdj-0002Al-54 for entmib@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 05:46:59 -0400 Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i6N9jZ5S016684 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 04:45:36 -0500 (CDT) Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 11:45:35 +0200 Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06CBD@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" To: Randy Presuhn , entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status - issue 307 Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 11:45:33 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org > > 307 'notSupported' is semantically wrong > > - This has been changed to 'unavailable'. Some people had wanted > > 'unknown'. Should > > I have changed this to unknown? > > Part of the difficulty in naming this one is that it seems to be doing > triple-duty for notApplicable as well as notSupported and notAvailable. > It's unclear whether the distinction would actually be useful, so as long > as everyone agrees that "unavailable" includes these cases, > I'd be happy. > And Juergen writes: > So "unknown" would IMHO be the better choice as it is clearly vague. I personally feel that unknown might better represent the 3 possible situations. ANd if those are indeed all 3 possible, then I'd suggest to state that in the DESCRIPTION clause as well. Bert _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Fri Jul 23 06:00:54 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA06125 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 06:00:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bnwh5-00021M-0o; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 05:50:23 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bnwd3-0000WC-75 for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 05:46:13 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id FAA05385 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 05:46:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com ([192.11.222.161]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bnwdj-0002Am-7w for entmib@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 05:46:59 -0400 Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i6N9jZHF016683 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 04:45:36 -0500 (CDT) Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 11:45:35 +0200 Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06CBC@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de, Randy Presuhn Subject: RE: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status - DateAndTime Erratum Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 11:45:33 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 769a46790fb42fbb0b0cc700c82f7081 Cc: entmib@ietf.org X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org > > > 311 DateAndTimeOrZero > > > - Didn't really have proposed resolution or rather we had a > > > couple comments after the proposed resolution > > ... > > > > Since DateAndTime is already used this way (and has been > > for a long time) I don't see the value of adding a new TC. > > However, it might make sense to see if we could agree on an > > erratum for RFC 2579. > > I agree. See my statement to this effect from Mon, 22 Mar > 2004 22:31:31 +0100. If nobody objects, I will submit an errata > with the following simple change: > > OLD: > 2 3 month 1..12 > 3 4 day 1..31 > > NEW: > 2 3 month 0..12 > 3 4 day 0..31 > > For those interested: '0000000000000000'H appears 58 times in the set > of published IETF MIB modules. So there is some clear evidence that > this "zero" value has been used before without introducing a new TC. > I can agree with the erratum submission. However, this is not something we should just decide on the EntMIB mailing list or WG. It is wider. And it does change the spec. So I'd like to at least have IESG approval. The risk is that they may suggest a 4 week IETF Last Call to make sure we have IETF consensus. After all it is a change (in my view a well justified, accaptable, and apparently used in practice) to a full STD document. Bert > /js > > -- > Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen > P.O. Box 750 561, > 28725 Bremen, Germany > > _______________________________________________ > Entmib mailing list > Entmib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Fri Jul 23 08:15:01 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA16377 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:15:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bnyvv-00085T-Er; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:13:51 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BnyjD-0003bs-CF for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:00:43 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA15004 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:00:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from merkur.iu-bremen.de ([212.201.44.27]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bnyjx-0004fK-7S for entmib@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:01:30 -0400 Received: from localhost (demetrius.iu-bremen.de [212.201.44.32]) by merkur.iu-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DAE29F8FA; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 14:00:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from merkur.iu-bremen.de ([212.201.44.27]) by localhost (demetrius [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 14534-10; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 14:00:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: from james.eecs.iu-bremen.de (unknown [212.201.47.145]) by merkur.iu-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A86C89F8CA; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 14:00:08 +0200 (CEST) Received: by james.eecs.iu-bremen.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9B0D782DA; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 14:00:08 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 14:00:08 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" Subject: Re: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status - DateAndTime Erratum Message-ID: <20040723120008.GA3964@iu-bremen.de> Mail-Followup-To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" , Randy Presuhn , entmib@ietf.org References: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06CBC@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06CBC@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new 20030616p5 at demetrius.iu-bremen.de X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 93238566e09e6e262849b4f805833007 Cc: Randy Presuhn , entmib@ietf.org X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 11:45:33AM +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > I can agree with the erratum submission. > However, this is not something we should just decide on the EntMIB mailing > list or WG. It is wider. And it does change the spec. So I'd like to at > least have IESG approval. The risk is that they may suggest a 4 week IETF > Last Call to make sure we have IETF consensus. After all it is a change > (in my view a well justified, accaptable, and apparently used in practice) > to a full STD document. So tell me what the procedure is to make it happen and then I will make up a calculation how much of my time it will cost and then I will decide whether I engage in this or just let things continue the way they are. [It the costs of getting this erratum in place is close to publishing an RFC on this subject, then I might conclude that other things are more important.] /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Fri Jul 23 08:40:07 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA18090 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:40:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BnzGN-0000Vr-F8; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:34:59 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BnzAN-00060w-Vh for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:28:48 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA17276 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:28:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com ([192.11.222.161]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BnzB8-0005MA-He for entmib@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 08:29:35 -0400 Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i6NCSBqD009307 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 07:28:12 -0500 (CDT) Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 14:28:11 +0200 Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06D27@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de, "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" Subject: RE: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status - DateAndTime Erratum Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 14:28:08 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: c1c65599517f9ac32519d043c37c5336 Cc: Randy Presuhn , entmib@ietf.org X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Why don't you send me the exact text for the erratum and I will feel the waters with IESG. Thanks, Bert > -----Original Message----- > From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de] > Sent: vrijdag 23 juli 2004 14:00 > To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) > Cc: Randy Presuhn; entmib@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status - DateAndTime Erratum > > > On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 11:45:33AM +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > > > I can agree with the erratum submission. > > > However, this is not something we should just decide on the > EntMIB mailing > > list or WG. It is wider. And it does change the spec. So > I'd like to at > > least have IESG approval. The risk is that they may suggest > a 4 week IETF > > Last Call to make sure we have IETF consensus. After all it > is a change > > (in my view a well justified, accaptable, and apparently > used in practice) > > to a full STD document. > > So tell me what the procedure is to make it happen and then I > will make > up a calculation how much of my time it will cost and then I > will decide > whether I engage in this or just let things continue the way they are. > > [It the costs of getting this erratum in place is close to publishing > an RFC on this subject, then I might conclude that other things are > more important.] > > /js > > -- > Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen > P.O. Box 750 561, > 28725 Bremen, Germany > _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Fri Jul 23 12:57:39 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA08969 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 12:57:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bo3L5-0003kw-Gv; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 12:56:07 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bo3JJ-00039J-Hc for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 12:54:17 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA08776 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 12:54:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from g516c.g.pppool.de ([80.185.81.108] helo=james.eecs.iu-bremen.de) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bo3K3-00024D-W4 for entmib@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 12:55:07 -0400 Received: by james.eecs.iu-bremen.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7F31682DA; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 18:54:10 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 18:54:10 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" Subject: Re: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status - DateAndTime Erratum Message-ID: <20040723165410.GA2234@iu-bremen.de> Mail-Followup-To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" , entmib@ietf.org, mreview@ops.ietf.org References: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06D27@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06D27@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32 Cc: entmib@ietf.org, mreview@ops.ietf.org X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 02:28:08PM +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > Why don't you send me the exact text for the erratum and I will > feel the waters with IESG. The DateAndTime TC does not define a special value which can be used in situations where a DateAndTime value is unknown and for some other reason not available. Several standards-track MIB modules use the value '0000000000000000'H in such situations. In order to formally legalize this established practice, the following errata to the DESCRIPTION clause of the DateAndTime TC is proposed: OLD: 2 3 month 1..12 3 4 day 1..31 NEW: 2 3 month 0 | 1..12 3 4 day 0 | 1..31 /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Fri Jul 23 13:50:55 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA12545 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:50:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bo48c-0000FI-Ng; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:47:18 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bo44c-0007f0-I2 for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:43:10 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA11600 for ; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:43:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from g5e53.g.pppool.de ([80.185.94.83] helo=james.eecs.iu-bremen.de) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bo45P-0002pM-R9 for entmib@ietf.org; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:44:01 -0400 Received: by james.eecs.iu-bremen.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9110982DA; Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:43:06 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 19:43:06 +0200 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" , entmib@ietf.org, mreview@ops.ietf.org Subject: Re: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status - DateAndTime Erratum Message-ID: <20040723174306.GA2412@iu-bremen.de> Mail-Followup-To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" , entmib@ietf.org, mreview@ops.ietf.org References: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504D06D27@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> <20040723165410.GA2234@iu-bremen.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040723165410.GA2234@iu-bremen.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040523i X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org On Fri, Jul 23, 2004 at 02:28:08PM +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > Why don't you send me the exact text for the erratum and I will > feel the waters with IESG. Here is version 1.1 with a bug fix applied: The DateAndTime TC does not define a special value which can be used in situations where a DateAndTime value is unknown or for some other reason not available. Several standards-track MIB modules use the value '0000000000000000'H in such situations. In order to formally legalize this established practice, the following errata to the DESCRIPTION clause of the DateAndTime TC is proposed: OLD: 2 3 month 1..12 3 4 day 1..31 NEW: 2 3 month 0 | 1..12 3 4 day 0 | 1..31 /js Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Thu Jul 29 16:45:36 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA08176 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:45:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BqHTX-0007qo-6r; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:26:03 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BqH2q-0004CG-So for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:58:28 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA05470 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:58:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from thumper.research.telcordia.com ([128.96.41.1]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BqH4n-0002IA-Eh for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 16:00:33 -0400 Received: from shannon.research.telcordia.com (shannon [128.96.81.11]) by thumper.research.telcordia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i6TJvUMS022844 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:57:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from kaj-100.research.telcordia.com (kaj-100.cc.telcordia.com [128.96.171.145]) by shannon.research.telcordia.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA29523 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:57:38 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20040729154242.048fde80@128.96.81.11> X-Sender: kaj@128.96.81.11 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2004 15:57:50 -0400 To: entmib@ietf.org From: Kaj Tesink Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? In-Reply-To: <20040720080457.GA1822@iu-bremen.de> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20040719162902.0179f8c0@128.96.81.11> <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4CA1C33@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com> <4.3.2.7.2.20040719162902.0179f8c0@128.96.81.11> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 10ba05e7e8a9aa6adb025f426bef3a30 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org to summarize where the suppl entity mib discussion stands: - the vague title seems resolvable; Dan had several specific suggestions; any others, pl post and/or resolve at the meeting - entSupplPhysicalUris Juergen's posting & subsequent discussion seem quite reasonable. assuming rough consensus i'll update the draft with this & any other changes agreed on the list and at the meeting, and telcordia will write the request for URN name space. - anything else? kaj PS due to parallel meetings it turns out that the telcordia person for this, John Haluska cannot attend the meeting but he and Dan will meet ad-hoc just prior to the entmib wg at 12:30PT in the entmib mtg room; any interested folks pl join At 10:04 AM 7/20/2004 +0200, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: >On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 04:36:47PM -0400, Kaj Tesink wrote: > > > > i cannot be present, but can check whether another telcordia person can > > attend. > > as far as the draft is concerned, we're talking actually only about two > > objects, > > of which only one is under debate. dave p. had volunteered a fix, so that > > could > > be something to discuss (URN approach). i'm personally rather flexible wrt > > the > > solution so if either the meeting or an adhoc group can coble up something > > we can put it in the draft and be done. > >I think the changes on the MIB side are rather straight forward. Below >is a first cut an proposed new text: > >3.2. entSupplPhysicalUris > > This object provides additional identification information about the > physical entity. This object may be used to encode for example a > URI containing a Common Language Equipment Identifier (CLEI) URI > [XXX] for the managed physical entity. If no additional identification > information is known or supported about the physical entity the object > is not instantiated. > >And in the MIB definition itself: > > entSupplPhysicalUris OBJECT-TYPE > SYNTAX DisplayString > MAX-ACCESS read-write > STATUS current > DESCRIPTION > "This object contains additional identification information > about the physical entity. The object contains URIs and > therefore the syntax of this object must conform to RFC > 2396 section 2. Multiple URIs may be separated by white > space characters." > ::= { entSupplPhysicalEntry 2 } > >The definition of the cleiCode OBJECT-IDENTITY will be removed and >someone from Telcordia needs to write up a document registering a >URN namespace for CLEI codes. > >Note that [XXX] would refer to a most likely informational RFC which >registers a URN namespace for CLEI codes. > >/js > >P.S. I will not attend the meeting in San Diego. > >-- >Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen > P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ REACH INFO HAS CHANGED; NEW INFO PER 7/19/04: _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Kaj Tesink Telcordia Technologies. Inc. 1 Telcordia Drive Piscataway, NJ 08854-3923 Email: kaj@research.telcordia.com Tel: (732) 699-6068 Fax: (732) 336-2336 _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib From entmib-bounces@ietf.org Sat Jul 31 12:41:44 2004 Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA05286 for ; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:41:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BqwmW-0002Ha-Ul; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:32:24 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bqwij-0001Zp-LS for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:28:29 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA04545 for ; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:28:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com ([192.11.222.161]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1BqwlA-0002GB-Cz for entmib@ietf.org; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 12:31:03 -0400 Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by ihemail1.lucent.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i6VGRmIa021489 for ; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 11:27:49 -0500 (CDT) Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id ; Sat, 31 Jul 2004 18:27:47 +0200 Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15504E1D43B@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" To: Kaj Tesink , entmib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 18:27:43 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 67c1ea29f88502ef6a32ccec927970f0 X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org Kaj, can you join in in the chatroom for the entmib? Thanks, Bert > -----Original Message----- > From: Kaj Tesink [mailto:kaj@research.telcordia.com] > Sent: donderdag 29 juli 2004 21:58 > To: entmib@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [Entmib] To meet or not to meet? > > > to summarize where the suppl entity mib discussion stands: > - the vague title seems resolvable; Dan had several specific > suggestions; > any others, pl post and/or resolve at the meeting > - entSupplPhysicalUris > Juergen's posting & subsequent discussion seem quite reasonable. > assuming rough consensus i'll update the draft with this & any > other changes agreed on the list and at the meeting, and > telcordia will write the request for URN name space. > - anything else? > > kaj > > PS due to parallel meetings it turns out that the telcordia person > for this, John Haluska cannot attend the meeting but he and Dan > will meet ad-hoc just prior to the entmib wg at 12:30PT in the entmib > mtg room; any interested folks pl join > > > > > At 10:04 AM 7/20/2004 +0200, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > >On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 04:36:47PM -0400, Kaj Tesink wrote: > > > > > > i cannot be present, but can check whether another > telcordia person can > > > attend. > > > as far as the draft is concerned, we're talking actually > only about two > > > objects, > > > of which only one is under debate. dave p. had > volunteered a fix, so that > > > could > > > be something to discuss (URN approach). i'm personally > rather flexible wrt > > > the > > > solution so if either the meeting or an adhoc group can > coble up something > > > we can put it in the draft and be done. > > > >I think the changes on the MIB side are rather straight > forward. Below > >is a first cut an proposed new text: > > > >3.2. entSupplPhysicalUris > > > > This object provides additional identification > information about the > > physical entity. This object may be used to encode for example a > > URI containing a Common Language Equipment Identifier (CLEI) URI > > [XXX] for the managed physical entity. If no additional > identification > > information is known or supported about the physical > entity the object > > is not instantiated. > > > >And in the MIB definition itself: > > > > entSupplPhysicalUris OBJECT-TYPE > > SYNTAX DisplayString > > MAX-ACCESS read-write > > STATUS current > > DESCRIPTION > > "This object contains additional identification > information > > about the physical entity. The object contains URIs and > > therefore the syntax of this object must conform to RFC > > 2396 section 2. Multiple URIs may be separated by white > > space characters." > > ::= { entSupplPhysicalEntry 2 } > > > >The definition of the cleiCode OBJECT-IDENTITY will be removed and > >someone from Telcordia needs to write up a document registering a > >URN namespace for CLEI codes. > > > >Note that [XXX] would refer to a most likely informational RFC which > >registers a URN namespace for CLEI codes. > > > >/js > > > >P.S. I will not attend the meeting in San Diego. > > > >-- > >Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen > > P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 > Bremen, Germany > > _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ > REACH INFO HAS CHANGED; NEW INFO PER 7/19/04: > _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ > > Kaj Tesink > Telcordia Technologies. Inc. > 1 Telcordia Drive > Piscataway, NJ 08854-3923 > Email: kaj@research.telcordia.com > Tel: (732) 699-6068 > Fax: (732) 336-2336 > > _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ > > > _______________________________________________ > Entmib mailing list > Entmib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib > _______________________________________________ Entmib mailing list Entmib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib