Re: [6lo] Focusing the charter

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Fri, 14 June 2013 18:14 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lo@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC3E321F9D29 for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 11:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ov1jkuaX-UET for <6lo@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 11:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3::184]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0302921F9D28 for <6lo@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 11:14:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A7EF20258; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:27:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: by sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 6BF2763A8C; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:13:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EECB639DF; Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:13:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Ulrich Herberg <ulrich@herberg.name>
In-Reply-To: <CAK=bVC92AAXXGMhH0khDJ584YPUv+mpBm1CvHU0OpCYMmESDMQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <DFF38ACA-5099-4EC0-B1BA-4FA977CC246F@tzi.org> <A13EB629-B1AC-4AA8-9DDB-EDAC691921FE@tzi.org> <CAK=bVC-pSY9qSbMew30HghQttTFuDc4B1hgO10Xsr9AnMtSdhA@mail.gmail.com> <6805.1371231731@sandelman.ca> <CAK=bVC92AAXXGMhH0khDJ584YPUv+mpBm1CvHU0OpCYMmESDMQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.3; nmh 1.3-dev; XEmacs 21.4 (patch 22)
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 14:13:09 -0400
Message-ID: <16260.1371233589@sandelman.ca>
Sender: mcr@sandelman.ca
Cc: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, "6lo@ietf.org" <6lo@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [6lo] Focusing the charter
X-BeenThere: 6lo@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Mailing list for discussion of a WG for Internet Area issues in IPv6 over constrained node networks." <6lo.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lo>
List-Post: <mailto:6lo@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lo>, <mailto:6lo-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 18:14:06 -0000

>>>>> "Ulrich" == Ulrich Herberg <ulrich@herberg.name> writes:
    Ulrich> The 6lowpan MIB may be useful, even though I am still
    Ulrich> wondering how SNMP can be used over link layers using
    Ulrich> 6lowpan (a discussion that was also started in COMAN). Maybe

    >> MIBs are not SNMP.  MIBs are a set of well defined counters (and
    >> other objects) defined in ASN.1.  SNMP is just one way of
    >> transporting queries about that ASN.1.

    Ulrich> I know. But are MIBs used by any protocol (in practice)
    Ulrich> other than SNMP?

NETCONF calls it's model YANG. (RFC6020)
The important part of a "MIB" discussion is not whether it's Counter32
or module foo{}.  

The important thing is that we agree on whether we are counting bytes or
packets for a particular counter, and if bytes, whether it includes the
layer-2 overhead or not. 

-- 
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [ 
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [ 
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [