Re: [Entmib] CONSENSUS CHECK: Undo entAliasMapping deprecation

"C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com> Tue, 17 August 2004 18:25 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 OAA04921 for <entmib-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:25:17 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bx8Rk-0003ms-Fl; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:12:32 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1Bx8Lf-0002hW-HO for entmib@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:06:15 -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 OAA04082 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:06:13 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from shell4.bayarea.net ([209.128.82.1]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bx8Rh-000145-KU for entmib@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 14:12:31 -0400
Received: from shell4.bayarea.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by shell4.bayarea.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i7HI6Aj5022193 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:06:10 -0700
Received: from localhost (heard@localhost) by shell4.bayarea.net (8.12.11/8.12.11/Submit) with ESMTP id i7HI6AkT022189 for <entmib@ietf.org>; Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:06:10 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: shell4.bayarea.net: heard owned process doing -bs
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 11:06:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: "C. M. Heard" <heard@pobox.com>
X-Sender: heard@shell4.bayarea.net
To: entmib@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Entmib] CONSENSUS CHECK: Undo entAliasMapping deprecation
In-Reply-To: <20040816082053.GD1761@iu-bremen.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10408171105130.21561-100000@shell4.bayarea.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 9466e0365fc95844abaf7c3f15a05c7d
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

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 11:41:02PM -0400, Margaret Wasserman wrote:
> 
> > During the Entity MIB meeting at IETF 60 in San Diego, there was 
> > consensus in the room  for the following course of action:
> > 
> > (1) Pull the Entity State MIB document out of IESG processing 
> > (currently submitted for publication as a Draft Standard)
> > 
> > (2) Update the document to undo the deprecation of the 
> > entAliasMapping identifier, and
> > 
> > (3) Re-submit the Entity MIB to the IESG for publication as a 
> > Proposed Standard.
> > 
> > We now need to confirm this consensus on the mailing list.  Are there 
> > any objections to taking this course of action?  Other comments?
> 
> Sounds like a good plan to me. But if we recycle at Proposed, why do 
> we then not simply put the entSupplPhysicalManufacturingDate and the
> entSupplPhysicalManufacturerInfo objects into the entPhysicalEntry
> where they actually belong? A new compliance statement would deal
> with these additions so existing implementations that comply to
> entity2Compliance would not be affected.

Let me add my voice to those supporting this idea.

Mike Heard


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