RE: Re: [ipcdn] Last Call: 'Cable Device Management Information B ase for Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specification Compliant CableMo dem s and Cable Modem Termination Systems' to Proposed Standard
"Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com> Thu, 02 March 2006 09:59 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FEkah-0001vS-Fi; Thu, 02 Mar 2006 04:59:23 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FEkag-0001uu-Ga for ipcdn@ietf.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2006 04:59:22 -0500
Received: from ihemail2.lucent.com ([192.11.222.163]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FEkae-0006o9-Rd for ipcdn@ietf.org; Thu, 02 Mar 2006 04:59:22 -0500
Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by ihemail2.lucent.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k229xBBY025441; Thu, 2 Mar 2006 03:59:12 -0600 (CST)
Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72) id <DVB4YVTF>; Thu, 2 Mar 2006 10:59:09 +0100
Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B15509721D26@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com>
From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
To: "Woundy, Richard" <Richard_Woundy@cable.comcast.com>, ipcdn@ietf.org
Subject: RE: Re: [ipcdn] Last Call: 'Cable Device Management Information B ase for Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specification Compliant CableMo dem s and Cable Modem Termination Systems' to Proposed Standard
Date: Thu, 02 Mar 2006 10:59:09 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2657.72)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by ihemail2.lucent.com id k229xBBY025441
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: a630332fa112280ecc4c4186b5c9ea83
Cc: Jean-Francois Mule <jf.mule@cablelabs.com>, Brian Hedstrom <B.Hedstrom@cablelabs.com>, rdroms@cisco.com
X-BeenThere: ipcdn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IP over Cable Data Network <ipcdn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn>, <mailto:ipcdn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ipcdn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ipcdn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn>, <mailto:ipcdn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: ipcdn-bounces@ietf.org
looks good to me. Bert > -----Original Message----- > From: Woundy, Richard [mailto:Richard_Woundy@cable.comcast.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 03:03 > To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); ipcdn@ietf.org > Cc: Brian Hedstrom; rdroms@cisco.com; Jean-Francois Mule; Woundy, > Richard > Subject: RE: Re: [ipcdn] Last Call: 'Cable Device Management > Information > Base for Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specification Compliant > CableModem s and Cable Modem Termination Systems' to Proposed Standard > > > Thanks, Bert. So here is the resulting change in my private > copy of the draft (to be submitted on Friday). > > OLD TEXT > > DESCRIPTION > "This is the MIB Module for DOCSIS-compliant > cable modems > and cable-modem termination systems. > > Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). The initial > version of this MIB module was published in RFC XXXX; > for full legal notices see the RFC itself. > Supplementary information may be available at: > http://www.ietf.org/copyrights/ianamib.html." > > NEW TEXT > > DESCRIPTION > "This is the MIB Module for DOCSIS-compliant > cable modems > and cable-modem termination systems. > > Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). > This version > of this MIB module was published in RFC XXXX; for full > legal notices see the RFC itself." > > In addition, my copy of the draft needed a similar > modification as discussed for the DOCSIS RF MIB per > <http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipcdn/current/msg01870.html>. > > OLD TEXT > > 2.4. DOCSIS or Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specification > > "Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specification". A term > referring > to the ITU-T J.112 [ITU-T_J.112] Annex B standard for cable modem > systems. [RFI1.0] [RFI1.1] [RFI2.0] > > NEW TEXT > > 2.4. DOCSIS or Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specification > > "Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specification". A term > referring > to the ITU-T Recommendation J.112 [ITU-T_J.112] Annex B > standard for > cable modem systems. [RFI1.0] [RFI1.1] [RFI2.0] > > -- Rich > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2006 10:55 AM > To: Woundy, Richard; ipcdn@ietf.org > Cc: Brian Hedstrom; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); rdroms@cisco.com; > Jean-Francois Mule > Subject: RE: Re: [ipcdn] Last Call: 'Cable Device Management > Information Base for Data-Over-Cable Service Interface > Specification Compliant CableModem s and Cable Modem > Termination Systems' to Proposed Standard > > > A nit: > > The DESCRIPTION clause of the MODULE-IDENTITY states: > DESCRIPTION > "This is the MIB Module for DOCSIS-compliant > cable modems > and cable-modem termination systems. > > Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). The initial > version of this MIB module was published in RFC XXXX; > for full legal notices see the RFC itself. > Supplementary information may be available at: > http://www.ietf.org/copyrights/ianamib.html." > > - I would change "The initial version" to "This version". > Because we really want people to look at this RFC which has this > version and not the initial version of RFC2669. > - I would remove the last sentence: > Supplementary information may be available at: > http://www.ietf.org/copyrights/ianamib.html. > because this is a standalone MIB module and is not maintained > by IANA at all. So IANA notices on copyrights do not apply I think. > I vaguely recall I had mentioned this earlier... but anyway. > Indeed I did mention it om 25 Nov 2005. > > I know I have the above in an RFC-Editor note, but since you > post a new rev anyway, I rather would see you fix it. > > > Bert > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Woundy, Richard [mailto:Richard_Woundy@cable.comcast.com] > > Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 16:45 > > To: ipcdn@ietf.org > > Cc: Brian Hedstrom; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); rdroms@cisco.com; > > Jean-Francois > > Mule; Woundy, Richard > > Subject: RE: Re: [ipcdn] Last Call: 'Cable Device Management > > Information > > Base for Data-Over-Cable Service Interface Specification Compliant > > CableModem s and Cable Modem Termination Systems' to > Proposed Standard > > > > > > Folks, > > > > I incorporated the changes mentioned below in a preliminary > > draft, > > <http://www.ipcdn.org/drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-11- > > proposed.txt>, with the XML version at > > <http://www.ipcdn.org/drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-11- > > proposed.xml>. > > > > Your comments are solicited and encouraged; this is the > > version I currently plan to submit on March 3rd if all goes well. > > > > I performed all of the same checks (online idnits tool, > > xml2rfc validator tool, and smilint) on this draft version, > > and got the same results (basically clean) as performed in > > <http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipcdn/current/msg01808.html>. > > > > As I edited the current draft, I discovered we needed one > > more update. We "anticipated" outbound LLC filters in the > > DOCSIS QoS MIB draft in section 3.3.4; now that the DOCSIS > > QoS MIB is published as RFC 4323, the text needed to be > > corrected. In addition, I needed to update the reference to > > the permanent RFC number, of course. > > > > OLD TEXT > > > > Lastly, any outbound LLC filters are applied to the packet > > just prior > > to it being emitted on the appropriate interface. This > MIB module > > does not specify any outbound LLC filters, but it is > > anticipated that > > the Quality of Service (QoS) additions to the DOCSIS standard > > [I-D.ietf-ipcdn-qos-mib] may include some outbound LLC filtering > > requirements. If so, those filters would be applied as described > > there. > > > > NEW TEXT > > > > Lastly, any outbound LLC filters are applied to the packet > > just prior > > to it being emitted on the appropriate interface. This > MIB module > > does not specify any outbound LLC filters, but section 3 of the > > DOCSIS Quality of Service (QoS) MIB, [RFC4323], includes > > outbound LLC > > filtering requirements. > > > > -- Rich > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Woundy, Richard > > Sent: Monday, February 27, 2006 12:34 AM > > To: ipcdn@ietf.org > > Cc: Brian Hedstrom; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); rdroms@cisco.com; > > Jean-Francois Mule; Woundy, Richard > > Subject: Re: [ipcdn] Last Call: 'Cable Device Management > > Information Base for Data-Over-Cable Service Interface > > Specification Compliant CableModem s and Cable Modem > > Termination Systems' to Proposed Standard > > > > > > Folks, > > > > This note summarizes the editor and WG chairs' response to > > the IETF Last Call comment received on 12/19/2005 by the IESG > > from Brian Hedstrom <b.hedstrom@cablelabs.com> on the ID: > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mib > > v2-10.txt. > > > > This email response has been previously shared with Brian > > Hedstrom and we believe it addresses the comment raised by > > him, based on existing product implementation and best common > > practices from DOCSIS cable operators. > > > > In short, we propose to address Brian's comment by adding > > clarification text in the current IPCDN MIB module to indicate: > > > > 1) CM implementations must report the *first* Syslog server > > from the DHCP log server option value if the DHCP option > > received by the CM was multi-valued, and > > > > 2) CM implementations must report the *active* time server > > from the DHCP time server option value if the DHCP option > > received by the CM was multi-valued. > > > > Let us know if there are any objections to this response by > > Friday March 3rd 5pm Eastern Time (note that the draft > > submission cut-off is Monday March 6th 9am ET). If there are > > no objections by this time, we will post the revision to the > > draft including only these two modifications and minimal > > editorial changes e.g. draft version, posting date, revision > > date, etc. Then we believe the IETF Last Call process will be > > complete, and we will assume the draft can proceed > > immediately to IESG evaluation and approval. > > > > Rich and Jean-François Mulé > > --- Rich as Editor of the IPCDN ID and both as IPCDN co-chairs > > --- > > > > In introduction, the chairs would like to note the following: > > a) the IPCDN Internet-Draft in question is an update to > > RFC 2669 (the original IPCDN Cable Device MIB) published in > > August 1999. The multi-valued options in DHCP are specified > > in RFC 2132 which was published prior to RFC2669 in March > > 1997, so the current MIB module restrictions for a single > > time server and single log (Syslog) server have been around > > for over six years, without any WG, vendor or cable modem > > operator comments raised during the updating of the RFC based > > on the inability for the MIB objects to reflect multi-value options; > > b) existing implementations and current DOCSIS cable modem > > compliance indicate that most manufacturers do effectively > > treat the log server options as single valued; > > c) most operators do rely on various, multiple mechanisms > > to provide server redundancy for Syslog servers; and > > d) existing implementations and current DOCSIS (1.1 and > > 2.0) cable modem compliance indicate that most manufacturers > > do effectively treat the time server options as multi valued > > for the purpose of determining a functional time server for a > > single boot-time time synchronization event, per DOCSIS RFI > > 1.1 section 9.2.7 and DOCSIS RFI 2.0 section 11.2.7. > > > > Furthermore, the Syslog server MIB object is read-writeable > > meaning that, after the CM completes DHCP, the CM may > > download a configuration file from the operator's OSS systems > > containing SNMP 'Set' commands for that MIB object. This > > provides cable operators additional flexibility and is yet > > another indicator that best common practice is to use a > > single value to set that option in the CM configuration files. > > > > This being said, we thank Brian for his comment and we > > believe that the comment should be taken into account to add > > clarification text in the 2 relevant MIB objects so that new > > implementers faced with the same questions know how to > > proceed for DOCSIS 1.x and 2.0. Even though we are not aware > > of inconsistent implementations, or the practical needs to > > address this concern, this may guarantee "more" consistency > > in the future. As for future versions of DOCSIS, operator > > guidance should be requested on these topics. > > > > --- Brian's comment: > > See full details at: > > http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipcdn/current/msg01837.html > > > > In summary, the comment raises a question on the support of > > multiple Syslog servers in the CM due to the limitations of > > docsDevEvSyslogAddress object when the CM is provided with > > multiple server values in DHCP Option 7. > > > > As Rich pointed out in: > > http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipcdn/current/msg01838.html > > the latest DOCSIS RFI specification available at: > > <http://www.cablemodem.com/downloads/specs/CM-SP-RFI2.0-I10-05 > > 1209.pdf>, > > in annex D.1.1, and RFC 2132, defines 5 DHCP options. Three > > of out the five standard DHCP options specified are allowed > > to be multi-valued: > > * Option code 3 (Router Option) > > * Option code 4 (Time Server Option) -> docsDevServerTimeAddress > > * Option code 7 (Log Server Option) -> docsDevEvSyslogAddress > > > > Note that the Router Option is not referenced by any MIB > > object in this MIB module. > > > > Based on the rationale explained above in introduction of > > this email, we propose to add the following text to the > > following objects in > > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mib > v2-10.txt: > > - docsDevServerTimeAddress: > NEW TEXT: > docsDevServerTimeAddress OBJECT-TYPE > SYNTAX InetAddress > MAX-ACCESS read-only > STATUS current > DESCRIPTION > "The Internet address of the RFC 868 Time server > as provided by DHCP option 4. > > Note that if multiple values are provided to the > CM in DHCP option 4, the value of this MIB object > MUST be the Time server address from which the Time > of Day reference was acquired based on the DOCSIS > RFI specification. During the period of time where > the Time of Day have not been acquired, the Time > server address reported by the CM may report the > first address value in the DHCP option value or the > last server address the CM attempted to get the Time > of day value. > > Returns the zero length octet string if the > time server > IP address is not provisioned." > REFERENCE > "DOCSIS RFI 1.1 Specification, Section 9.2.7. and > DOCSIS RFI 2.0 Specification, Section 11.2.7." > ::= { docsDevServer 9 } > > > - docsDevEvSyslogAddress: > NEW TEXT: > docsDevEvSyslogAddress OBJECT-TYPE > SYNTAX InetAddress > MAX-ACCESS read-write > STATUS current > DESCRIPTION > "The Internet address of the Syslog server as > provided by > DHCP option 7 or set via SNMP management. If the > address of the server is set to any of the zero length > string, the 0.0.0.0 IPv4 address or the 0: > IPv6 address, > Syslog transmission is inhibited. > > Note that if multiple values are provided to the CM in > DHCP option 7, the value of this MIB object > MUST be the > first Syslog server address received. > > By default at agent boot, this object returns the zero > length string." > ::= { docsDevEvent 10 } > > We believe this addresses the comment by indicating how > current implementations deal with this situation. > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ IPCDN mailing list IPCDN@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn
- RE: Re: [ipcdn] Last Call: 'Cable Device Manageme… Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
- RE: Re: [ipcdn] Last Call: 'Cable Device Manageme… Wijnen, Bert (Bert)