[IETFMIBS] mib root ?

Hans Sjöstrand <hans.sjostrand@transmode.com> Fri, 20 February 2009 11:02 UTC

Return-Path: <hans.sjostrand@transmode.com>
X-Original-To: ietfmibs@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfmibs@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4842B3A6A99; Fri, 20 Feb 2009 03:02:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.949
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.949 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BVZMEBTJMGKD; Fri, 20 Feb 2009 03:02:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gw1.transmode.se (gw1.transmode.se [213.115.205.20]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 524033A68C7; Fri, 20 Feb 2009 03:02:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tmnt04.transmode.se (tmnt04.transmode.se [192.168.46.15]) by gw1.transmode.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id A163B611C8; Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:02:48 +0100 (CET)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6619.12
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 12:02:47 +0100
Message-ID: <FDE730FF0FC8FF418E96A281037F0D279BA315@tmnt04.transmode.se>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: mib root ?
Thread-Index: AcmTSsN5w1e+QuqfQ66TrSbvoWg8yw==
From: Hans Sjöstrand <hans.sjostrand@transmode.com>
To: ietfmibs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 05:57:54 -0800
Cc: mip4@ietf.org
Subject: [IETFMIBS] mib root ?
X-BeenThere: ietfmibs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF MIB Discussion list <ietfmibs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietfmibs>, <mailto:ietfmibs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietfmibs>
List-Post: <mailto:ietfmibs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietfmibs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietfmibs>, <mailto:ietfmibs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2009 11:02:38 -0000

Hi,

In the mip4 group we are adding mib support for the RFC3519 "Mobile IP Traversal of Network Address Translation (NAT) Devices" to the mip mib. We decided not to extend the RFC2006bis with it, but instead write a extension mib, http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mip4-udptunnel-mib-01

The question is where this mib is best rooted. The intention was to root it under the assigned mipMIB OID { mib-2 44 } and then hand over the administration of that OID to IANA. Somewhat like it was done in MPLS , ...mib-2.transmission.mplsStdMIB (1.3.6.1.2.1.10.166) in http://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers

But this seams not to be the most common way to take, more common is to root also extensions of existing wg mibs directly under mib-2. 

The questions are; 
- What are the advantages and disadvantages with the two approaches ? 
- Which is your recommendation (Or is there even a preferred third variant) ? 

Best regards
/// Hasse