RE: [Entmib] Final Closure on Entity State MIB Issues

"Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com> Tue, 23 March 2004 15:17 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA02428 for <entmib-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:17:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1B5neH-0003Kq-2H; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:17:01 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1B5ndc-0003CB-0g for entmib@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:16:20 -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 KAA02300 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:16:15 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B5ndY-0000Ih-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:16:17 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1B5ncb-0000Bb-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:15:18 -0500
Received: from hoemail1.lucent.com ([192.11.226.161] helo=hoemail1.firewall.lucent.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B5nbm-0007lw-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:14:26 -0500
Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by hoemail1.firewall.lucent.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i2NFDH215618 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:13:26 -0600 (CST)
Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id <1699ZYFP>; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 16:13:15 +0100
Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15503DB1146@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com>
From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
To: Sharon Chisholm <schishol@nortelnetworks.com>, entmib@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Entmib] Final Closure on Entity State MIB Issues
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 16:13:13 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60
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>

> #322: Textual Convention Names (Prefix)
> 
> 	I think the TC names should be prefixed.
> 
> Sharon> Ok. I think we need to step back a level on this one. 
> We seemed to
> have had agreement on the list that if the TCs were intended to be not
> specific to Entities, then they should not have the prefix 
> but if they were
> they should. So, I suspect we are disagreeing on whether these TCs are
> specific to Entities. I certainly never intended them to be 
> and went out of
> my way to ensure they weren't. Is there something in their 
> definition that
> leads you to believe they are limited in their application to 
> Entities?
> 

It seems to me that your TCs shoudl be prefixed with something aka

   ItuXxxx
   
or
   UtuX731Xxxx

That is what they claim to represent.
And having said that... should it be a separate ITU module (i.e. have ITU
in the name and TC-MIB as a suffix) ??
Maybe to heavy ?

> #325:
> 
> 	The figures in the discussion of this issue are wrong as
> 	xxxCompliances(1) and xxxGroups(2) are typically registered
> 	below xxxConformance(2).
> 
> Sharon> This is from the MIB Review Guidelines. 
> 
I think Juergen meant to say that you are using xxxConformance(3)
while you should be using xxxConformance(2).

Your OIDs look like:
OID tree
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx  entityStateMIB  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: module-identity
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.0  entStateNotifications  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: oid-value-assignment
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.0.1  entStateOperEnabled  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: notification-type
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.0.2  entStateOperDisabled  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: notification-type
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1  entStateObjects  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: oid-value-assignment
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.1  entStateTable  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: table-object-type
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.1.1  entStateEntry  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: row-object-type
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.1.1.1  entStateLastChanged  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: columnar-object-type
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.1.1.2  entStateAdmin  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: columnar-object-type
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.1.1.3  entStateOper  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: columnar-object-type
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.1.1.4  entStateUsage  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: columnar-object-type
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.1.1.5  entStateAlarm  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: columnar-object-type
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.1.1.1.6  entStateStandby  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: columnar-object-type
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.3  entStateConformance  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: oid-value-assignment
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.3.1  entStateCompliances  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: oid-value-assignment
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.3.1.1  entStateCompliance  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: module-compliance
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.3.2  entStateGroups  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: oid-value-assignment
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.3.2.1  entStateGroup  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: object-group
1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.3.2.2  entStateNotificationsGroup  [ENTITY-STATE-MIB]: notification-group
**end of oid tree**

And so 1.3.6.1.2.1.xx.2 was skipped (for as far as we can tell no good reason).



Bert

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