RE: [802.1 - 1083] FW: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity Fault Management MIB
"Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com> Wed, 15 November 2006 18:39 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GkPf4-0006SS-68; Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:39:02 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GkPf2-0006Qv-GD for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:39:00 -0500
Received: from ihemail3.lucent.com ([135.245.0.37]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GkPex-0006C6-3T for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:39:00 -0500
Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by ihemail3.lucent.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id kAFIcrN3008419; Wed, 15 Nov 2006 12:38:53 -0600 (CST)
Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id <R9BL6SCL>; Wed, 15 Nov 2006 19:38:51 +0100
Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B1550AF1D735@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com>
From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@AVAYA.COM>, STDS-802-1-L@listserv.ieee.org
Subject: RE: [802.1 - 1083] FW: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity Fault Management MIB
Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 19:38:49 +0100
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: 6ffdee8af20de249c24731d8414917d3
Cc: "Bridge-Mib (E-mail)" <bridge-mib@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Bridge MIB <bridge-mib.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib>, <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:bridge-mib@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib>, <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bridge-mib-bounces@ietf.org
Let me try a few (immediate and obvious answers). But I am not answering all... and of course I am not the author/editor of the MIB. see inline > -----Original Message----- > From: IEEE 802.1 list-owner > [mailto:hdk-731.q1d4kd0tvk@att.net]On Behalf > Of Romascanu, Dan (Dan) > Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 12:08 > To: STDS-802-1-L@listserv.ieee.org > Subject: [802.1 - 1083] FW: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity Fault Management > MIB > > > Norm, > > Can we have these questions answered in the next few days? > > Unless those are matters of clarification I will forward them as > technical comments in my ballot. > > Dan > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alex Rozin [mailto:arozin@mrv.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 8:35 AM > To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); MIB Doctors; Bridge-Mib (E-mail) > Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity Fault Management MIB > > Please provide clarifications for the IEEE8021-CFM-MIB in .1ag: > > 1. If dot1agCfmStackMepId==0 (a MEP is not configured on an > interface), > what value does index dot1agCfmMdIndex have in dot1agCfmStackTable? > Norm and I were discussion the security considerations and part of that was/is the fact that an interface may have disappeared over a reboot. In that case, Norm suggested to use zero for ifIndex. Seems fine to me. Syntax then will have to be changed to InterfaceIndexOr Zero. > 2. Why the index, for example, in dot1agCfmMdTable is an > single integer > one (dot1agCfmMdIndex) and not a pair {dot1agCfmMdFormat, > dot1agCfmMdName}? > In this case we will not need the object > dot1agCfmMdTableNextIndex, etc. > This will create VERY long OIDs. Possibly so long that a CREATE will not fit in one SNMP PDU. > 3. The same concerns dot1agCfmMaIndex vs. {dot1agCfmMaFormat, > dot1agCfmMaName}. In another words, why cannot we index > dot1agCfmMaTable > by index {dot1agCfmMdFormat, dot1agCfmMdName, dot1agCfmMaFormat, > dot1agCfmMaName}? > same here > 4. Why do we have both the field dot1agCfmMaMoreThanOneVid > and a special > interval for dot1agCfmMaIndex to reflect a association with VLAN? IMHO > simpler method is to have in this table number of VLANs, that > may be 0. > That would probably work also. Not sure why it is so much simpler. But I could live with it. > 5. In the Table 17-1 object dot1agCfmMdIndex is referred to > 12.14.2.1.2:b, but 12.14.2.1.2:b describes "An MD Level". > Could you use integer index dot1agCfmStackLevel instead? > I will leave that to Norm or David (MIB editor) Bert > Thanks, Alex > > -----Original Message----- > From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com] > Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 12:10 AM > To: MIB Doctors; Bridge-Mib (E-mail) > Subject: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity Fault Management MIB > > > The IEEE 802.1 P802.1ag/D7.1 - Connectivity Fault Management > is running > a recirculation ballot. > > The full standard draft is available at: > > http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/private/ag-drafts/d7/802-1ag-d7-1.pdf > > The MIB module in txt format is available at: > > http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/private/ag-drafts/d7/8021ag71.mib > > Please review and provide comments until 11/23 to me, Bert, > or the IEEE > 802.1 WG e-mail list. > > Folks who need the IEEE Web site username and password for the purpose > of reviewing these documents are invited to approach me or Bert. > > Dan > > > ---- IEEE 802.1 Email List ---- > DELETE THIS FOOTER from copies, forwards, & replies. > Working Group 802.1 Web pages: > http://www.ieee802.org/1/ > Active ballots: P802.1ag, P802.1AR; see > http://www.ieee802.org/1/active-ballots.html > List subscriber pages: > http://www.ieee802.org/1/email-pages/pztfq906.html > _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib
- [Bridge-mib] Connectivity Fault Management MIB Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- RE: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity Fault Management MIB Alex Rozin
- RE: [802.1 - 1083] FW: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity … Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
- RE: [802.1 - 1083] FW: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity … Alex Rozin