[MIB-DOCTORS] Re: IfTypeReferences - ds3 and sip (SMDS) and coffee

[Keith McCloghrie <[e-mail]>]

I think "maintenance in the future" is the key factor -- not only is it
extra work, but also the best case is likely to be that such extra work gets
done at regular intervals, and within the intervals, the references are
inconsistent (some will include the most recent; others will not).

Keith.
 
> Interesting and strange stuff that I am finding.
> 
> Keith answered:
> > > > 5. RFC 1694 is a later (than RFC 1304) reference for 
> > > > 'sip(31)', and RFC 2325 is needed as a reference if "coffee"
> > > > is included in the row.
> > > > I suggest it would be useful to expand the acronym to be: SIP (SMDS
> > > > Interface Protocol), but perhaps that negates the reference 
> > > > to "coffee" ??
> > > 
> > > Hmmmm 2325 is an April 1st RFC. Should we list it at all?
> > > Cause I do not think that the sip IfType applies at all, it is more of
> > > a joke and might confuse people who do not understand the APril 1st RFCs.
> > > 
> 
> So I have for coffee:
>       <!--label-->     <c>coffee</c>
>       <!--ifType-->    <c>132</c>
>       <!--MIBoid-->    <c>transmission 132</c>
>       <!--MIBmodule--> <c>COFFEE-POT-MIB</c>
>       <!--Reference--> <c><xref target='RFC2325'/></c>
>       <!--comment-->   <c>April 1st RFC
>                          <vspace blanklines='0' />
>                           It does mention ifType sip(31) too.
>                        </c>
> 
> So that one does list sip(31), but I think that was a joke
> (e.g. take a sip of coffee).
> 
> > > So I'd prefer to just list 1694.
> >  
> > So, why aren't/haven't they been confused by:
> > 
> >                    sip(31),            -- SMDS, coffee
> > 
> > in http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianaiftype-mib ??  Shouldn't we
> > be consistent ??
> > 
> 
> The sip(31) SMDS documents (RFC1304 and RFC1694) do not contain the word
> coffee or Coffee. So I'd suggest to the iana to remove coffee from sip(31)
> comment. 
> 
> For sip(31) I now have:
> 
>       <!--label-->     <c>sip</c>
>       <!--ifType-->    <c>31</c>
>       <!--MIBoid-->    <c>mib2.36</c>
>       <!--MIBmodule--> <c>SIP-MIB</c>
>       <!--Reference--> <c><xref target='RFC1694'/> (DS)</c>
>       <!--comment-->   <c>SMDS
>                          <vspace blanklines='0' />
>                           initial: RFC1304-MIB <xref target='RFC1304'/>
>                          <vspace blanklines='0' />
>                           obsoleted by: SIP-MIB <xref target='RFC1407'/> (PS)
>                          <vspace blanklines='0' />
>                           sip OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { transmission 31 }
>                        </c>
> 
> 
> Do people think that the it is handy/useful to:
> - have the reference to the most current RFC 
> - include the status (PS, DS...)
> - list the obsoleted RFCs as well
> - add the OID for "sip" (last line) ??
> 
> The reason I ask is that, now that I am going through all this in detail, it is
> easy to add. Problem might be: maintenance in the future.
> 
> I wondered about this when I also composed the data for ds3(30):
> 
>      <!--label-->     <c>ds3</c>
>      <!--ifType-->    <c>30</c>
>      <!--MIBoid-->    <c>transmission.30</c>
>      <!--MIBmodule--> <c>DS3-MIB</c>
>      <!--Reference--> <c><xref target='RFC3896'/> (PS)</c>
>      <!--comment-->   <c>DS3/E3 MIB
>                         <vspace blanklines='0' />
>                          experimental: RFC1288-MIB <xref target='RFC1288'/>
>                         <vspace blanklines='0' />
>                          obsoleted by: RFC1407-MIB <xref target='RFC1407'/>
>                         <vspace blanklines='0' />
>                          obsoleted by: DS3-MIB <xref target='RFC2496'/>
>                         <vspace blanklines='0' />
>                          obsoleted by: DS3-MIB <xref target='RFC3896'/> (PS)
>                         <vspace blanklines='0' />
>                          ds3 MODULE-IDENTITY ::= { transmission 30 }
>                       </c>
> 
> Oh well, comments always welcome.
> 
> The more I poke into this, the more I see that it is a big hodge podge of
> approaches. And I wonder how a NMS can make sense out of it.
> 
> Bert
> 

_______________________________________________
MIB-DOCTORS mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors