Re: [Entmib] I thought we were keeping entAliasMappingTable?

Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com> Wed, 24 March 2004 14:09 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 JAA22822 for <entmib-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:09:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1B6940-0006gK-GB; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:09:00 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1B693l-0006fq-0p for entmib@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:08:45 -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 JAA22793 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:08:42 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B693j-0001oj-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:08:43 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1B692X-0001Z8-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:07:30 -0500
Received: from sj-iport-4.cisco.com ([171.68.10.86]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1B691y-0001H6-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 09:06:54 -0500
Received: from mira-sjc5-c.cisco.com (IDENT:mirapoint@mira-sjc5-c.cisco.com [171.71.163.17]) by sj-core-3.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id i2OE6KBB014530; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 06:06:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ABIERMAN-W2K.cisco.com (sjc-vpn2-669.cisco.com [10.21.114.157]) by mira-sjc5-c.cisco.com (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.3.6-GR) with ESMTP id ASG06125; Wed, 24 Mar 2004 06:06:20 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <6.0.3.0.2.20040324055842.0360e260@fedex.cisco.com>
X-Sender: abierman@fedex.cisco.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.3.0
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 06:02:38 -0800
To: "Sharon Chisholm" <schishol@nortelnetworks.com>
From: Andy Bierman <abierman@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: [Entmib] I thought we were keeping entAliasMappingTable?
Cc: entmib@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <3549C09B853DD5119B540002A52CDD340A967B52@zcard0ka.ca.norte l.com>
References: <3549C09B853DD5119B540002A52CDD340A967B52@zcard0ka.ca.nortel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
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>

At 01:52 PM 3/23/2004, Sharon Chisholm wrote:
>hi
>
>I was just looking at the lasted version of the Entity MIB version 3 and I
>notice that the entAliasMappingTable is still deprecated. I thought we
>agreed to keep this table?  
>
>It's a critical table that ties together the logical interfaces and the
>ports. If we deprecate this table we will a leave huge gaping hole in our
>information model. I think it is worth holding back advancement until we get
>implementation reports if that is what it takes.

Then where are the implementations if this is so critical?
I think Cisco was the only vendor to submit an implementation
report for this table, and it's only in a few of our products.


>Sharon Chisholm
>Portfolio Integration
>Nortel Networks
>Ottawa, Canada

Andy


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