RE: [Hubmib] Hubmib documents status

"Matt Squire" <MSquire@HatterasNetworks.com> Mon, 23 October 2006 00:27 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gbnex-000133-FE; Sun, 22 Oct 2006 20:27:19 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gbnew-00012y-2W for hubmib@ietf.org; Sun, 22 Oct 2006 20:27:18 -0400
Received: from mail.hatterasnetworks.com ([72.15.200.21]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gbneu-0007Gq-Ne for hubmib@ietf.org; Sun, 22 Oct 2006 20:27:18 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [Hubmib] Hubmib documents status
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 20:27:03 -0400
Message-ID: <467C77F6373BDE4BB16A3E8A62C03955A56ADC@Exchserv.hatteras.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [Hubmib] Hubmib documents status
Thread-Index: Acbx/Qs+MMM/1DJ9T/GiRKvqbH15OAEPGSAw
From: Matt Squire <MSquire@HatterasNetworks.com>
To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>, "Hubmib Mailing List (E-mail)" <hubmib@ietf.org>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 10ba05e7e8a9aa6adb025f426bef3a30
Cc:
X-BeenThere: hubmib@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Ethernet Interfaces an Hub MIB WG <hubmib.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hubmib>, <mailto:hubmib-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:hubmib@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hubmib-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hubmib>, <mailto:hubmib-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: hubmib-bounces@ietf.org

Bert - 

The -05 version of draft-ietf-hubmib-efm-mib was submitted early today
as an Internet draft, and should be showing up in the database early
next week.  The changes from the -04 version are:

- Changed last paragraph of Section 5 as per D Perkins comment

- Changed text around the initial OUI value from "zero" to "three octets
of zero" per D Perkins comment

- Changed PDU size information to (0|64..1518) rather than (0..1518)
with text saying "1..63 are not allowed"

- Changed the order of enable/disable in the OAM state variable, and
changed the order of passive/active in the OAM mode variable to match
the order of these values in Clause 30 of 802.3 based on suggestions
from yourself and Dan

- Changed headers/titles to reflect new version and date

Everything else should be the same as in the -04 version.  

- Matt


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 11:00 AM
> To: Hubmib Mailing List (E-mail)
> Subject: [Hubmib] Hubmib documents status
> 
> Dear HUBMIB WG members.
> 
> Below is the status of the documents that we have on our plate.
> This is the status that Dan reported to me, after which I did
> a little bit of follow up.
> 
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hubmib-efm-mib-04.txt
> waiting for revision after MIB Doctor review by David Perkins and
> following discussion. I (Bert) have an outstanding ping to Matt
> Squire, the editor of this document, for a response on this.
> I really hope we can have an answer and a revised MIB document soon.
> 
>
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hubmib-efm-epon-mib-05.tx
t
> revised after MIB Doctor review by Dave Perkins. No confirmation
> from David if he is happy with this version. I (Bert) have pinged
> David to see if we can get an answer soon.
> 
>
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hubmib-rfc3636bis-05.txt
> submitted to the AD for consideration as Proposed Standard. Mike Heard
> assigned as MIB Doctor, has done review and reported so to our WG list
> a few days ago. I (Bert) havce re-issued a request for Publication
> (with a few changes to the proto-write-up) which I have copied
> (earlier today) to the WG list. So for this document, we DID make the
> milestones as listed in our current WG charter.
> 
>
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hubmib-efm-cu-mib-06.txt
> following WGLC of revision 5, a set of changes was required, including
> moving the ifAvailableStackTable to a distinct MIB module (say
> IF-AVAILABLE-STACK-MIB, seating directly under MIB-2) and adding an
> inverse table ifInvAvailableStackTable, which would allow the ADSLMIB
> WG to refer and re-use them. The new revison (6) was posted on
> Oct 12th. I (Bert) am hereby asking the WG for review (I will issue a
> WG LC in a separate message) to approve the changes.
> 
> Pls note that these 3 documents
> 
>
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hubmib-efm-cu-mib-06.txt
>   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hubmib-efm-epon-mib-
> 05.txt
>   http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hubmib-efm-mib-04.txt
> 
> all 3 have a milestone in our current WG charter for submission to the
> IESG in November 2006. So we have max 6 weeks to complete this work.
> 
> Bert
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Hubmib mailing list
> Hubmib@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hubmib

_______________________________________________
Hubmib mailing list
Hubmib@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hubmib