Re: Consensus Check - SDLC Objects for RS-232 MIB

A N Ananth <ananth@access.digex.net> Thu, 03 March 1994 19:59 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09419; 3 Mar 94 14:59 EST
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09415; 3 Mar 94 14:59 EST
Received: from hubbub.cisco.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14772; 3 Mar 94 14:59 EST
Received: from access1.digex.net by hubbub.cisco.com with SMTP id AA15888 (8.6.4/IDA-1.5 for <snadlcmib@cisco.com>); Thu, 3 Mar 1994 11:20:49 -0800
Received: by access1.digex.net id AA29182 (5.67a8/IDA-1.5 for snadlcmib@cisco.com); Thu, 3 Mar 1994 14:20:46 -0500
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 1994 14:20:46 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: A N Ananth <ananth@access.digex.net>
Subject: Re: Consensus Check - SDLC Objects for RS-232 MIB
To: char-mib@pa.dec.com, snadlcmib@cisco.com
In-Reply-To: <9403031525.AA28766@xap.xyplex.com>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9403031447.A11696-0100000@access1.digex.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset="US-ASCII"

> A few people spoke in favor of adding some SDLC-related objects to the RS-232
> MIB.  They were reposted just recently by Wayne Clark, SNA SDLC MIB editor.
> They could be added as a separate compliance group for SDLC, but I didn't do
> so due to the general apathy.  The following test of consensus is intended to
> insite response.  Depending on the response, I may try the other way around.
> 
> ******** Consensus Test *********
> 
> Are there strong objections to leaving out the proposed SDLC objects?

we would be IN FAVOUR of including these objects in the RS-232 MIB.

we are in the process implementing X.25 support (RFC1381/2) and are
quite frankly baffled as to how some of these objects were missed in 
the RS-232 MIB (eg NRZ/NRZI). we plan to implement the proposed SDLC
MIB soon and would thus vote yes.

ananth	     <ananth@digex.com>        Phone: (410) 765-9281
Prism Communications Inc               "See the colours"