RE: [Entmib] FW: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-entmib-v3-07.txt

Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com> Wed, 02 February 2005 15:50 UTC

Received: from megatron.ietf.org (megatron.ietf.org [132.151.6.71]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA19792 for <entmib-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Feb 2005 10:50:54 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CwMgo-0007wb-32; Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:45:10 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CwMbI-0006U3-Gv for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:39:28 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA18194 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Wed, 2 Feb 2005 10:39:24 -0500 (EST)
Received: from sj-iport-1-in.cisco.com ([171.71.176.70] helo=sj-iport-1.cisco.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CwMtS-0002mJ-ER for entmib@ietf.org; Wed, 02 Feb 2005 10:58:16 -0500
Received: from sj-core-5.cisco.com (171.71.177.238) by sj-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Feb 2005 07:47:55 -0800
X-BrightmailFiltered: true
X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA==
Received: from mira-sjc5-c.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-c.cisco.com [171.71.163.17]) by sj-core-5.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j12FceF1021553; Wed, 2 Feb 2005 07:38:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from abierman-xp.cisco.com (sjc-vpn4-542.cisco.com [10.21.82.30]) by mira-sjc5-c.cisco.com (MOS 3.4.5-GR) with ESMTP id BDI17116; Wed, 2 Feb 2005 07:38:40 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20050202073232.025c9cd8@fedex.cisco.com>
X-Sender: abierman@fedex.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 07:38:39 -0800
To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
From: Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com>
Subject: RE: [Entmib] FW: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-entmib-v3-07.txt
In-Reply-To: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15503C7A05A@nl0006exch001u.nl .lucent.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 73734d43604d52d23b3eba644a169745
Cc: "Entmib-wg \(E-mail\)" <entmib@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: entmib@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Entity MIB WG <entmib.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib>, <mailto:entmib-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
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>
Sender: entmib-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: entmib-bounces@ietf.org

At 07:05 AM 2/2/2005, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
>Can the author/editor and/or the WG react please.
>I need (if possible) an answer by tomorrow (Thursday) 11am US
>eastern at the latest (that is, if we want to try and get this 
>approved this week).

what are the edits? CLEI URI to CLEI URN. reference
RFC 2396 -> RFC 3986.  Any other nits?  Can't you just carry 
forward an edit list without an update?

It's not like these updates require anybody to comment.
Who's going to object to fixing a nit?


>Bert

Andy



>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: entmib-bounces@ietf.org 
>> [mailto:entmib-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf
>> Of Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 01:05
>> To: Entmib-wg (E-mail)
>> Subject: [Entmib] FW: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-entmib-v3-07.txt
>> 
>> 
>> Feedback from IESG
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: iesg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:iesg-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of
>> Ted Hardie
>> Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 23:28
>> To: iesg@ietf.org
>> Subject: DISCUSS: draft-ietf-entmib-v3-07.txt
>> 
>> 
>> Minor, but should be fixed.  The document currently says:
>> 
>> entPhysicalUris OBJECT-TYPE
>>      SYNTAX      OCTET STRING
>>      MAX-ACCESS  read-write
>>      STATUS      current
>>      DESCRIPTION
>>              "This object contains additional identification 
>> information
>>              about the physical entity. The object contains URIs and
>>              therefore the syntax of this object must conform to RFC
>>              2396, section 2.
>> 
>>              Multiple URIs may be present and are separated by white
>>              space characters. Leading and trailing white space
>>              characters are ignored.
>> 
>>              If no additional identification information is known or
>>              supported about the physical entity the object is not
>>              instantiated.  A zero length octet string may also be
>>              returned in this case."
>>      REFERENCE
>>              "RFC 2396, Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic
>>              Syntax, section 2, August 1998."
>> 
>> This should be updated to the new URI RFC and a pointer to the
>> appropriate syntax restrictions.  This text also does not limit
>> the types of URIs which may be present.  If they are limited,
>> an enumerated list should be included.
>> 
>> The document also uses "CLEI URI" to refer to a URN in the CLEI
>> namespace.  That's technically correct, but it would be easier
>> to understand if CLEI URN was used.  Here's an example:
>> 
>>      The entPhysicalUris object may be used to encode for 
>> example a URI
>>      containing a Common Language Equipment Identifier (CLEI) URI for
>>      the managed physical entity. The URN name space for CLEIs is
>>      defined in [RFC CLEIURN], and the CLEI format is defined in
>>      [T1.213][T1.213a]. 
>> 
>> Simply swapping out (CLEI) URI for (CLEI) URN would be fine.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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