RE: GMPLS MIB I-D updates

["Thomas D. Nadeau" <[e-mail]>]

         Hi,

>Thanks for the posting.
>I have not yet looked at these new MIBs.
>If they are indeed updates or enhancements to the MPLS versions,
>then they should follow the rules/guidelines that we have for
>updating MIB Modules as outlined in RFC2578.

         The question of what to name the documents is up
to the WG; the co-authors are indifferent on this issue.
Just some background.  The state of the GMPLS MIBs is that they
do indeed extend existing  MPLS MIBs  to facilitate new GMPLS
functions. Specifically, they have been modified to
accommodate longer labels, and a few other things.
However, in the future, additional modifications, features and functions
may be added that are GMPLS-specific.

>That is independent of the question of which WG does the work.

         As I recall, the question of where this work is to be done
was already discussed and decided that it would happen in
CCAMP. However, the ADs, George and Kareeti might want to
verify this for us all. The co-authors are agnostic as to where the work
gets done; however, the point raised above about the MIBs potentially
changing more for GMPLS-specifics might bias the work to be done
in CCAMP. This is also why we chose the naming of the documents.

         --Tom



>Bert
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Joan Cucchiara [mailto:[e-mail]]
> > Sent: Friday, January 25, 2002 1:43 AM
> > To: Cheenu Srinivasan
> > Cc: [e-mail]; Kireeti Kompella; Vijay Gill
> > Subject: Re: GMPLS MIB I-D updates
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > I would like to raise 2 concerns with having this working
> > group adopt draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-lsr-mib-01.txt (aka
> > GMPLS-LSR-MIB)
> > and draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-te-mib-01.txt (aka GMPLS-TE-MIB):
> >
> > 1) Since these 2 proposed MIBs (GMPLS-LSR-MIB and GMPLS-TE-MIB)
> > are updates to 2 of the MIBs in the MPLS working group,
> > namely the MPLS-LSR-MIB and the MPLS-TE-MIB, I think these MIBs
> > should be proposed in the MPLS working group which is where folks
> > have experience in implementing and using them.  In my opinion the
> > additions for GMPLS to these MIBs is minor and it would be better
> > to stick with the MPLS working group for these MIBs.
> >
> > 2) The choice of names for these MIBs, i.e. GMPLS-LSR-MIB and
> > GMPLS-TE-MIB,
> > does not follow how the IETF names a new version of a MIB.
> > The current trend in the IETF is to use the same name for
> > the draft versions of an existing MIB and differentiate this
> > with the draft title (and eventually a new RFC number).  As examples:
> >
> > draft-ietf-atommib-rfc2558bis-00.txt with MIB name: SONET-MIB
> > draft-ietf-atommib-rfc2496bis-00.txt with MIB name: DS3-MIB
> > draft-ietf-hubmib-etherif-mib-v3-00.txt with MIB name: EtherLike-MIB
> > draft-ietf-hubmib-mau-mib-v3-00.txt with MIB name: MAU-MIB
> > draft-ietf-snmpv3-update-mib-07.txt with MIB name: SNMPv2-MIB
> > and many others...
> >
> > My biggest concern is that the names of GMPLS-LSR-MIB and GMPLS-TE-MIB
> > will be confusing and misleading to customers.  Could these be
> > renamed MPLS-LSR-MIB and MPLS-TE-MIB, and thus, accurately reflect
> > what they are?
> >
> > thanks,
> >  -Joan
> >
> > Cheenu Srinivasan wrote:
> > >
> > > We would like to request that these four I-Ds be adopted as CCAMP
> > > working group documents.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Tom, Cheenu, Adrian, Tim, Ed
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Cheenu Srinivasan
> > > > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 12:48 PM
> > > > To: [e-mail]
> > > > Cc: Thomas Nadeau (E-mail); Adrian Farrel (E-mail); Tim
> > Hall (E-mail);
> > > > Ed Harrison (E-mail)
> > > > Subject: GMPLS MIB I-D updates
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The following I-D updates have been posted:
> > > >
> > > >   draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-01.txt
> > > >   draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-lsr-mib-01.txt
> > > >   draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-te-mib-01.txt
> > > >   draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-label-mib-01.txt
> > > >
> > > > They are aligned with each other and have been verified to
> > > > compile cleanly with smilint.
> > > >
> > > > They should appear on the IETF's site shortly. Copies are
> > > > attached for your reference.
> > > >
> > > > Cheenu
> > > >
> >



------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.