Re: Working Group Status

Steve Horowitz <witz@chipcom.com> Tue, 06 July 1993 22:15 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13217; 6 Jul 93 18:15 EDT
Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13211; 6 Jul 93 18:15 EDT
Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA20557; Tue, 6 Jul 93 17:57:17 -0400
X-Resent-To: chassismib@CS.UTK.EDU ; Tue, 6 Jul 1993 17:57:16 EDT
Errors-To: owner-chassismib@CS.UTK.EDU
Received: from chipcom.com by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK) id AA20544; Tue, 6 Jul 93 17:57:14 -0400
Received: from teach.stealth ([151.104.9.58]) by chipcom.com (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA18112; Tue, 6 Jul 93 17:55:06 EDT
Received: by teach.stealth (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00828; Tue, 6 Jul 93 17:57:31 EDT
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 93 17:57:31 EDT
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Steve Horowitz <witz@chipcom.com>
Message-Id: <9307062157.AA00828@teach.stealth>
To: chassismib@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: Working Group Status

I am concerned about the possibility of the chassis mib dropping on 
the floor since this mib was used as one of the arguments for
dropping the repeater ID object from the hubmib.

Is this really a possibility ?  If so, how are we to manage (in a standard
way), multiple repeaters per agent ?

-- Steve H. 

> From owner-chassismib@CS.UTK.EDU Tue Jul  6 17:31:22 1993
> Return-Path: <owner-chassismib@CS.UTK.EDU>
> Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by chipcom.com (4.1/SMI-4.0)
> 	id AA17957; Tue, 6 Jul 93 17:31:02 EDT
> Errors-To: owner-chassismib@CS.UTK.EDU
> Received: from localhost by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK)
> 	id AA16187; Tue, 6 Jul 93 16:48:04 -0400
> X-Resent-To: chassismib@CS.UTK.EDU ; Tue, 6 Jul 1993 16:48:03 EDT
> Errors-To: owner-chassismib@CS.UTK.EDU
> Received: from pobox.synoptics.com by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61+IDA+UTK-930125/2.8s-UTK)
> 	id AA16158; Tue, 6 Jul 93 16:47:59 -0400
> Received: from donatello (donatello.synoptics.com) by synoptics.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
> 	id AA06590; Tue, 6 Jul 93 13:47:25 PDT
> Received: by donatello (4.1/2.0N)
> 	   id AA09044; Tue, 6 Jul 93 13:47:24 PDT
> Message-Id: <9307062047.AA09044@donatello>
> Date: Tue, 6 Jul 93 13:47:24 PDT
> From: Andrew Bierman <abierman@synoptics.com>
> To: chassismib@cs.utk.edu, rlstewart@eng.xyplex.com
> Subject: Re: Working Group Status
> Content-Length: 1853
> X-Lines: 39
> Status: RO
> 
> 
> > July 5 was our deadline to have a document ready for recommendation as a
> > Proposed Standard.  The volume of discussion on the list lately has improved,
> > but I must apologize that I have not had time to follow it either to moderate
> > or contribute, and as such I have little idea as to where the document stands.
> > Yes, that means I've not been a good chair.  Real Life intruded.  Anyway...
> > 
> > *** Call for Consensus ***
> > 
> > Assuming that we have a relatively up-to-date draft, I propose that we drop it
> > in the laps of the Network Management Area Director and his Directorate.  They
> > may a) pass it on as a Proposed Standard, b) extend our charter, pick a chair
> > that will actually help, and ask that it be improved in specific ways, c)
> > terminate the working group, or d) do something else they think of.
> > 
> > Noting that we have little other choice, do I hear strong objections or
> > alternatives?  Also please note that I will not be able to even look at
> > replies until Friday (Real Life).  At least this provides an organized topic
> > for yelling, and some of the Directorate people are surely listening.
> > 
> > *** No-Meeting Announcement ***
> > 
> > We are on the agenda for Amsterdam.  This was a bit unusual, as our schedule
> > defines us as done by then.  Due to the aforementioned intrusion of Real Life,
> > I will not be in Amsterdam.  There will be no Chassis MIB meeting there.  I
> > apologize for this late notice.  See previous excuses.
> > 
> > 	Bob
> > 
> this is most unfortunate...
> I feel that the MIB was pretty close, and that there was a good
> chance of reaching consensus at the amsterdam meeting...it seems
> an almost done deal that the WG will be disbanded...
> 
> is the meeting definately cancelled...because I have to change
> my travel plans and I won't be able to change them twice
> (if a meeting is added back to the schedule)
> 
> --andy;
>