Re: [coman] [6lo] WG Review: IPv6 over Networks of Resource-constrained Nodes (6lo)

[Benoit Claise <[e-mail]>]

Jürgen,
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 04:07:15PM +0200, Benoit Claise wrote:
>>> My understanding is that the charter refers to
>>>
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-schoenw-6lowpan-mib-03
>>>
>>> and that it not aims at a general discussion about network management
>>> of constrained devices. That is, it refers to concrete work instead of
>>> abstract work.
>> That's actually my point. Should we focus on developing a MIB
>> module, taking for granting that SNMP is THE way to manage
>> constrained nodes? Or should we ask ourselves: based on the
>> collected management requirements, let's see what is more
>> appropriate?
> One more time: The goal here is to define the number and the semantics
> of the counters that need to implemented in the 6LoWPAN layer in order
> to enable basic monitoring and troubleshooting. The formalism we have
> (as a standard) for that are MIB modules.
>
> There are several ways to transport the data over various protocols
> today and there may be even more in the future. This activity is about
> getting agreement what exactly needs to be counted where in the
> 6LoWPAN processing.
Interesting.
And not point to say "one more time...", I only focus on the charter 
text, which is the contract between the IESG and WG.
When I read it:

	Specifically, 6lo will work on:
	...
	2. Related MIB modules

How am I supposed to understand what you have in mind?
This specific entry has to improve.

Regards, Benoit
>
>> You know, like I2RS is currently doing, instead of jumping to
>> NETCONF/YANG directly because it seemed like the solution.
> If you believe this is needed here in order to define a bunch of
> counters.
>
> /js
>