Re: comments on draft-ietf-iplpdn-frmib-dte-04.txt
Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com> Tue, 09 May 1995 19:35 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa08782; 9 May 95 15:35 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa08778; 9 May 95 15:34 EDT
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14764; 9 May 95 15:34 EDT
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa08762; 9 May 95 15:34 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa08758; 9 May 95 15:34 EDT
Received: from stilton.cisco.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa14750; 9 May 95 15:34 EDT
Received: from [171.69.128.114] (fred-mac-fr.cisco.com [171.69.128.114]) by stilton.cisco.com (8.6.8+c/8.6.5) with SMTP id MAA28975; Tue, 9 May 1995 12:33:55 -0700
X-Sender: fred@stilton.cisco.com
Message-Id: <v02120c12abd573106e49@[171.69.128.114]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Tue, 09 May 1995 12:33:59 -0700
To: John Shriver <jas@shiva.com>
X-Orig-Sender: iplpdn-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>
Subject: Re: comments on draft-ietf-iplpdn-frmib-dte-04.txt
Cc: cbrown@wellfleet.com, carvalho@cisco.com, iplpdn@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
At 3:20 PM 5/9/95, John Shriver wrote: >The object: > > frDlcmiState OBJECT-TYPE > SYNTAX INTEGER { > noLmiConfigured (1), > lmiRev1 (2), > ansiT1_617_D (3), -- ANSI T1.617 Annex D > ansiT1_617_B (4), -- ANSI T1.617 Annex B > ccitt_933_A (5) -- CCITT Q933 Annex A > } > MAX-ACCESS read-write > STATUS current > DESCRIPTION > "This variable states which Data Link Connec- > tion Management scheme is active (and by impli- > cation, what DLCI it uses) on the Frame Relay > interface." > REFERENCE > "Draft American National Standard T1.617-1991" > ::= { frDlcmiEntry 2 } > >Is missing one value, in my reckoning. ANSI T1.617a-1994 revises >Annex D in an incompatible way. (Thanks, ANSI! The "element >identifier" of "Link integrity verification information element" is >changed from 0x19 to 0x03.) What idiot did that? Did they do anything useful with the protocol (tell you the Bc/Be/throughput values, perhaps) that would justify implementing it? >I'd say it should be revised to: > > frDlcmiState OBJECT-TYPE > SYNTAX INTEGER { > noLmiConfigured (1), > lmiRev1 (2), -- Interim LMI Revision 1 > ansiT1_617_D (3), -- ANSI T1.617-1991 Annex D > ansiT1_617_B (4), -- ANSI T1.617-1991 Annex B > ccitt_933_A (5), -- CCITT Q933 Annex A > ansiT1_617_1994_D (6) -- ANSI T1.617a-1994 Annex D > } > MAX-ACCESS read-write > STATUS current > DESCRIPTION > "This variable states which Data Link Connec- > tion Management scheme is active (and by impli- > cation, what DLCI it uses) on the Frame Relay > interface." > REFERENCE > "American National Standard T1.617-1991. > American National Standard T1.617a-1994. > ITU-T Recommendation Q.933 (03/93)." > >(Note also that many of the ANSI standard references are outdated.) Caralyn, Charles, your opinions? Anyone else? =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= computers run on smoke, it if leaks out they won't run
- comments on draft-ietf-iplpdn-frmib-dte-04.txt John Shriver
- Re: comments on draft-ietf-iplpdn-frmib-dte-04.txt Fred Baker
- Re: comments on draft-ietf-iplpdn-frmib-dte-04.txt John Shriver
- Re: comments on draft-ietf-iplpdn-frmib-dte-04.txt Rick Cornetti
- Re: comments on draft-ietf-iplpdn-frmib-dte-04.txt Caralyn Brown
- Re: comments on draft-ietf-iplpdn-frmib-dte-04.txt Fred Baker