IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Next Steps

"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Mon, 12 January 2004 06:09 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA02020 for <entmib-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 01:09:30 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfvG1-0002fc-1S; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 01:09:01 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AfvFt-0002ex-Be for entmib@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 01:08:53 -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 BAA02015 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 01:08:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfvFq-0001G2-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 01:08:50 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AfvE3-0001E3-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 01:07:00 -0500
Received: from tierw.net.avaya.com ([198.152.13.100]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AfvDj-0001Bm-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 01:06:39 -0500
Received: from tierw.net.avaya.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tierw.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id i0C63Hiv015070 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 01:03:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from IS0004AVEXU1.global.avaya.com (h135-64-105-51.avaya.com [135.64.105.51]) by tierw.net.avaya.com (Switch-3.1.2/Switch-3.1.0) with ESMTP id i0C63Biv015020 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Mon, 12 Jan 2004 01:03:12 -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] Entity State MIB Next Steps
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2004 08:06:27 +0200
Message-ID: <AAB4B3D3CF0F454F98272CBE187FDE2F0522A070@is0004avexu1.global.avaya.com>
Thread-Topic: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Next Steps
Thread-Index: AcPWuA2BsLiEET7xRs+543TEu915jwBz63VQ
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: Sharon Chisholm <schishol@nortelnetworks.com>, entmib@ietf.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60
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

I agree with 1) and including the proposal that we should go through a Last Call again. I do not feel that we had consensus that this is the right balance between lack of complexity and useful functionality, and the WG participants should have the formal opportunity to provide again their inputs.

Regards,

Dan



> -----Original Message-----
> From: entmib-admin@ietf.org [mailto:entmib-admin@ietf.org]On 
> Behalf Of Sharon Chisholm
> Sent: 09 January, 2004 3:49 PM
> To: entmib@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Next Steps
> 
> 
> Hi
> 
> My vote is for 1), except if the current update resolves 
> issues from the
> previous working group last call do we need a second? There 
> was substantial
> rewrite, but no objects were changed. I could go either way.
> 
> I'm hoping that the more concise text in the latest version 
> appeases the
> concern that what the working group has come up with is too 
> complicated.
> 
> Sharon
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Margaret Wasserman [mailto:margaret@thingmagic.com] 
> Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 8:26 AM
> To: entmib@ietf.org
> Subject: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Next Steps
> 
> 
> 
> Now that the newest version of the Entity State MIB is 
> available, the WG has
> a decision to make.  In my opinion, we have two
> choices:
> 
> (1) We decide that the structure and objects defined in the 
> current draft
> are acceptable, and we send the current draft to WG Last Call 
> in order to
> identify and resolve final issues.
> 
> (2) We decide that we want to change the structure or objects 
> defined in
> this MIB to make it simpler or more functional.
> 
> I would appreciate it if people would respond to this message 
> with their
> opinions, so that I can attempt to judge the consensus of the 
> WG on this
> issue.
> 
> Thanks,
> Margaret
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

v2.14.0 | Report a Bug | By Email