RE: [Entmib] Confirmming Meeting Consensus

"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Tue, 09 December 2003 13:08 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA24715 for <entmib-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:08:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AThar-0004Yr-5B; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 08:08:01 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1ATha4-0004Ll-6u for entmib@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 08:07:12 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id IAA24685 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:06:56 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ATha3-0006td-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 08:07:11 -0500
Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com ([198.152.12.100]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1ATha2-0006tZ-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2003 08:07:10 -0500
Received: from tiere.net.avaya.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id hB9D6VFo029196 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:06:31 -0500 (EST)
Received: from IS0004AVEXU1.global.avaya.com (h135-64-105-51.avaya.com [135.64.105.51]) by tiere.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id hB9D6TFo029175 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:06:30 -0500 (EST)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [Entmib] Confirmming Meeting Consensus
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 15:07:07 +0200
Message-ID: <AAB4B3D3CF0F454F98272CBE187FDE2F04259868@is0004avexu1.global.avaya.com>
Thread-Topic: [Entmib] Confirmming Meeting Consensus
Thread-Index: AcO+NUH9R8p/gXTOSWynup8t0sa3swAH9FHw
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: Syam Madanapalli <madanapalli@hotmail.com>, entmib@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: entmib-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: entmib-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib>, <mailto:entmib-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG <entmib.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:entmib@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:entmib-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib>, <mailto:entmib-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Syam,

Can you clarify what is IPv6-specific in the state model proposed by the Internet-Draft that you are referring to?

Thanks and Regards,

Dan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: entmib-admin@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-admin@ietf.org]On 
> Behalf Of Syam Madanapalli
> Sent: 09 December, 2003 11:14 AM
> To: entmib@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Entmib] Confirmming Meeting Consensus
> 
> 
> I am wondering if the following draft brings any interest
> for the Entity State MIB.
> 
> State Model for IPv6 Interfaces
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-syam-ipv6-state-model-00.txt
> 
> But this state model is only for IPv6 Interfaces whereas 
> Entity State MIB
> covers every thing.
> 
> Thank you,
> Syam
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder" <j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de>
> To: <Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com>
> Cc: <entmib@ietf.org>
> Sent: Monday, December 08, 2003 7:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [Entmib] Confirmming Meeting Consensus
> 
> 
> > On Mon, Dec 08, 2003 at 08:24:11AM -0500, 
> Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com
> wrote:
> > >
> > > During the meeting in Minneapolis, there was agreement
> > > in the room on a few points, an dI'd like to confirm
> > > that consensus on the mailing list.
> > >
> > > In particular, we reached agreement at the meeting on
> > > the following points:
> > >
> > >  - We will deprecate the Alias Mapping Table so that the Entity
> > >    MIB can advance to Draft Standard.
> >
> > Well, this is what it takes...
> >
> > >  - Future extensions to the Entity MIB should be handled as
> > >    separate MIBs that augment the Entity MIB.
> >
> > Not sure how useful such a blanket statement is.
> >
> > >  - The Entity State MIB is currently too complex and should be
> > >    simplified.
> >
> > I like to know what precisely people find too complex 
> before subscribing
> > to such a blanket statement. Can someone please explain (and perhaps
> > suggest what precisely needs to be removed)?
> >
> > /js
> >
> > --
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder     International University Bremen
> > <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>     P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen,
> Germany
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Entmib mailing list
> > Entmib@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Entmib mailing list
> Entmib@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib
> 

_______________________________________________
Entmib mailing list
Entmib@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib