Re: [Entmib] entPhysicalUris object wrap-up

[Kaj Tesink <[e-mail]>]

At 01:24 PM 12/8/2004, Margaret Wasserman wrote:

>>I propose that this object be changed back to entPhysicalClei.
>>It should contain the empty string (for none) or a URI
>>string conforming to the CLEI URN specification (from Kaj).
>>If we think of other required semantics in the future,
>>we can add new objects then.


works for me; this is fairly close to the original request
(but see my previous note on how we got to the URI solution)



>This makes sense to me if we can quickly, easily resolve the reference issues.


my sense is that there are several references we can use, including
the T1.213 references which are authoritative on the CLEI format.
the draft i submitted just turns that format into a URI.



>Otherwise, I think we should just remove the object and let others add it 
>as an "augments" if/when the proposed contents are well-defined.
>
>>2) references
>>
>>As per Bert's comments, the citation to RFC 2396 will be
>>removed from the DESCRIPTION clause, since it is redundant.
>>Should this be changed to point to the CLEI URN specification,
>>or just add another document to the REFERENCE clause?
>>Where else should this spec be cited in the document?
>>There are normative references, so how long will the
>>Entity MIB be held up waiting for the CLEI URN RFC?
>
>If we pursue this choice, I think that the CLEI URN document needs to be a 
>normative reference.  Kaj submitted a draft, but I don't know what shape 
>it is in and/or whether Bert is willing to either: (1) allow this group to 
>take on that document, or (2) move it forward as an individual 
>submission.  How close do folks think it is to ready for publication?  Has 
>a MIB doctor reviewed it?  Bert, do you have any thoughts?


the URN document is a standard request for the particular name space;
so it follows the path stipulated in RFC3406.
my understanding of that process (sect 4.3) is that after
mailing to <mailto:[e-mail]>[e-mail] and
a two week discussion period
(one week has past already) the spec will be reviewed by the IESG.
i'm unfamiliar with the length of that review but as the spec has been
written using the standard template and closely parallels
several other published URN RFCs the process should be straightforward.



>>3) conformance
>>
>>Currently the new OBJECT-GROUP (entityPhysical3Group)
>>is in the MANDATORY-GROUPS clause.  If both objects
>>allow for null values, then this should not be a problem.
>
>Okay.


yup


>>4) examples
>>
>>I don't really have time (or enough info) to fill in the
>>examples in section 4, but I know somebody will eventually
>>ask about this before RFC publication.  I would really
>>appreciate some help updating the examples.  (I need to
>>add an example for entPhysicalClass==cpu(12) as well.)
>>Any volunteers? (4.1 and 4.2 can be done independently)
>>I would like to get this over with now ;-)
>
>Yes.  It would be good to get this finished, so volunteer would be 
>appreciated.


if you like to add the Uri object to the exaample section
we could leverage the examples in the example
section of the CLEI URN document:

**********************************************************************
3.  Examples

    The following three examples are based on the examples provided in
    [T1.213a], and correspond with three different sets of features by
    three different manufacturers (Nortel Networks, Lear and Lucent
    Technologies) producing "D4CE" (a particular D4 channel bank type)
    equipment. The fourth example refers to a SONET power unit convertor
    of Alcatel.

       URN:CLEI:D4CE18B7AA
       URN:CLEI:D4CE4248AA
       URN:CLEI:D4CE363PAB
       URN:CLEI:SNPWBBC7AA
*********************************************************************

however, if you like to create an example in section 4 using the
acme approach in the other examples i would have to find some bogus
CLEI code for acme. is that what you're looking for?

kaj




>Margaret
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Entmib mailing list
>[e-mail]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

Kaj Tesink
Telcordia Technologies. Inc.
One Telcordia drive
Piscataway, NJ 08854
Email: [e-mail]
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/


_______________________________________________
Entmib mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib