Re: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status

"Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> Thu, 22 July 2004 23:09 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 TAA27124 for <entmib-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 19:09:39 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BnmKt-0006wx-0v; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 18:46:47 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1BnjpK-0001jy-94 for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:06:02 -0400
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 QAA23786 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:06:00 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.48]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bnjpw-0000Sz-UO for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 16:06:41 -0400
Received: from h-68-166-38-176.snvacaid.dynamic.covad.net ([68.166.38.176] helo=oemcomputer) by mallard.mail.pas.earthlink.net with smtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 1BnjpI-0005pV-00 for entmib@ietf.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:06:00 -0700
Message-ID: <006e01c47027$9b138640$7f1afea9@oemcomputer>
From: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
To: <entmib@ietf.org>
References: <713043CE8B8E1348AF3C546DBE02C1B4D9EAC6@zcarhxm2.corp.nortel.com>
Subject: Re: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 13:08:07 -0700
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1437
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ea4ac80f790299f943f0a53be7e1a21a
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

Hi -

> From: "Sharon Chisholm" <schishol@nortelnetworks.com>
> To: <entmib@ietf.org>
> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 6:31 AM
> Subject: [Entmib] Entity State MIB Status
...
>  307 'notSupported' is semantically wrong
> - This has been changed to 'unavailable'. Some people had wanted
> 'unknown'. Should
> I have changed this to unknown?

Part of the difficulty in naming this one is that it seems to be doing
triple-duty for notApplicable as well as notSupported and notAvailable.
It's unclear whether the distinction would actually be useful, so as long
as everyone agrees that "unavailable" includes these cases, I'd be happy.

>  311 DateAndTimeOrZero
> - Didn't really have proposed resolution or rather we had a couple
> comments after
> the proposed resolution
...

Since DateAndTime is already used this way (and has been for a long time)
I don't see the value of adding a new TC.  However, it might make sense
to see if we could agree on an erratum for RFC 2579.

Randy



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