FW: [Bridge-mib] Pre-last-call review

"Harrington, David" <dbh@enterasys.com> Tue, 13 April 2004 21:43 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA11451 for <bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:43:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BDVUY-0003SZ-GA for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:30:50 -0400
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i3DLUoKb013286 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:30:50 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BDVIf-0006wK-4B; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 17:18:33 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1BDUbE-0003Yo-HX for bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:33:40 -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 QAA05763 for <bridge-mib@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:33:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BDUbC-00077z-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:33:38 -0400
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1BDUV6-0006NX-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:27:21 -0400
Received: from gtfw2.enterasys.com ([12.25.1.128] ident=firewall-user) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1BDUPv-0005lP-00 for Bridge-mib@ietf.org; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:21:59 -0400
Received: from NHROCAVG2.ets.enterasys.com (nhrocavg2.enterasys.com [134.141.79.124]) by gtfw2.enterasys.com (0.25.1/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i3DKLmTD008614 for <Bridge-mib@ietf.org>; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:21:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from NHROCCNC1.ets.enterasys.com ([134.141.79.124]) by 134.141.79.124 with InterScan Messaging Security Suite; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:21:49 -0400
Received: from source ([134.141.77.90]) by host ([134.141.79.124]) with SMTP; Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:21:49 -0400
Received: from nhrocmbx1 ([134.141.79.104]) by NHROCCNC1.ets.enterasys.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:21:49 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: FW: [Bridge-mib] Pre-last-call review
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:21:30 -0400
Message-ID: <6D745637A7E0F94DA070743C55CDA9BA01976BC1@NHROCMBX1.ets.enterasys.com>
Thread-Topic: [Bridge-mib] Pre-last-call review
Thread-Index: AcQhc33EyPuY9nEGRdekefrMquK2CAAEIf4wAAF9iyAAAre58A==
From: "Harrington, David" <dbh@enterasys.com>
To: <Bridge-mib@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Apr 2004 20:21:49.0114 (UTC) FILETIME=[F32151A0:01C42194]
X-pstn-version: pmps:sps_win32_1_1_0c1 pase:2.5
X-pstn-levels: (C:82.4442 M:97.3254 P:95.9108 R:95.9108 S:99.9000 )
X-pstn-settings: 4 (0.2500:0.7500) p:13 m:13 C:14 r:13
X-pstn-addresses: from <dbh@enterasys.com> forward (org good)
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
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib>, <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <bridge-mib.ietf.org>
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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi Dan,

I asked the question deliberately because I thought they might be out of
sync already. 

I tend to favor the idea of putting out an Informational RFC with a
pointer to the IEEE 802.1X mib, or an Informational RFC with a pointer
to the website for IEEE 802.1 mibs. I think we will never keep them in
sync, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to publish an IETF version of
the mib.

dbh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 2:24 PM
> To: C. M. Heard; Harrington, David
> Cc: Bridge-mib@ietf.org; Les Bell
> Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] Pre-last-call review
> 
> > > 6) an IEEE/IETF sync review - have the IEEE
> > > designs changed such that these mibs are no
> > > longer appropriate?
> > 
> > I have verified that the module matches the one
> > on the IEEE web site, modulo the changes put in
> > that were needed to make it compile.  However,
> > the IEEE was working on an update while this
> > was going on.  I don't know the status of tat
> > effort, but if the IEEE has finished that
> > work, then we should probably republishe the
> > new version, not this one.
> > 
> 
> Mike is raising a good issue. What is the point of issuing a 
> MIB document aligned with the older version of IEEE 802.1X? 
> The revision (D9) was in Sponsor Ballot last February, so it 
> should not be far from approval.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dan
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Bridge-mib mailing list
Bridge-mib@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib