[Pce] 2nd try - Re: PCE MIB modules

["A S Kiran Koushik" <[e-mail]>]

> Hi Emile/PCE group members,
>
> Thanks for this message. I have gone through this thread and the existing
> MIBs. I have listed my comments/observations below:
>
> 1. In general, we do not include "STD" for a draft MIB. Only
> when they are about to become RFC, we call them STD.
>
> Before becoming an RFC we have "DRAFT" for the MIBs.
> This way if some companies want to implement the draft versions
> and later want to upgrade to standard versions do not have a name
> clash with the OIDs.
>
>
> 2. I agree with most of your decomposition.
> However, I want to propose :
> PCEP-DRAFT-MIB         draft-ietf-pcep-mib
>
> instead of
> PCE-COMP-STD-MIB         draft-ietf-pce-comp-mib
>
> This will give a clear idea to the user on what the MIB contains.
>
> So the new decomposition looks like:
> MIB module               WG draft name
> ================================================
> PCE-DISC-DRAFT-MIB         draft-ietf-pce-disc-mib
> -- PCE discovery MIB.
>
> PCEP-DRAFT-MIB         draft-ietf-pcep-mib
> -- PCE communication protocol MIB
>
> PCE-PCC-DRAFT-MIB          draft-ietf-pce-pcc-mib
> -- Path Computation Client MIB
>
> PCE-TC-DRAFT-MIB           draft-ietf-pce-tc-mib
> -- PCE Textual conventions MIB.
>
> 3. I see that the SMIv2 structures of the existing MIB modules
> need to be fixed and SMIC utility must be run. I can take care of that.
>
> 4. I will also start working on the PCEP-MIB for which you will
> be my co-author.
>
> Please let me know if you have any more comments/observations? I
> intend to start working on these soon.
>
> Regards,
> Kiran.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "STEPHAN Emile RD-CORE-LAN" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>; "A S Kiran Koushik" <[e-mail]>; 
> <[e-mail]>
> Cc: "LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN" <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2006 10:46 AM
> Subject: PCE MIB modules
>
>
> Hi Kiran, Adrian and JP
>
>
> I am really happy that Kiran join us. I am sure that we are going to do 
> excellent works together... and that there is enough work for 2 people.
>
> So let's start.
>
> In July we identify the following MIB modules decomposition.
>
> MIB module               WG draft name
> ================================================
> PCE-DISC-STD-MIB         draft-ietf-pce-disc-mib
> PCE-COMP-STD-MIB         draft-ietf-pce-comp-mib
> PCE-PCC-STD-MIB          draft-ietf-pce-pcc-mib
> PCE-TC-STD-MIB           draft-ietf-pce-tc-mib
>
> draft-ietf-pce-disc-mib and draft-ietf-pce-tc-mib are already in progress.
>
> As JP spoke recently of a "PCEP MIB", I want to be sure that we still agree on 
> this decomposition?
>
> Then I propose to draft the abstract of each document conjointly with the 
> chairs.
>
> Finally, I think that we may identify the drafts and the sections giving 
> directions to write each MIB module.
>
> At this point, each of us will share the minimal understanding before writing 
> any SMI line.
>
> Regards
> Emile
>
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De: Adrian Farrel [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Envoy: vendredi 28 juillet 2006 14:08
> : STEPHAN Emile RD-CORE-LAN
> Cc: LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN; [e-mail]
> Objet: Re: PCE MIB modules names
>
> Good work.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Adrian
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "STEPHAN Emile RD-CORE-LAN" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Cc: "LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN" <[e-mail]>;
> <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 11:02 AM
> Subject: RE: PCE MIB modules names
>
>
> Hi Adrian,
>
> I think we got it:
>
> MIB module               WG draft name
> ================================================
> PCE-DISC-STD-MIB         draft-ietf-pce-disc-mib
> PCE-COMP-STD-MIB         draft-ietf-pce-comp-mib
> PCE-PCC-STD-MIB          draft-ietf-pce-pcc-mib
> PCE-TC-STD-MIB           draft-ietf-pce-tc-mib
>
>
> According to that I will firstly review and rename my current draft as
> draft-stephan-pce-disc-mib-00.txt. Then I will create
> draft-stephan-pce-tc-mib-00.txt. Finally I will post both of them.
>
> Regards
> Emile
>
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : Adrian Farrel [mailto:[e-mail]]
>> Envoy : mercredi 26 juillet 2006 18:04
>>  : STEPHAN Emile RD-CORE-LAN; [e-mail]
>> Cc : LE ROUX Jean-Louis RD-CORE-LAN
>> Objet : Re: PCE MIB modules names
>>
>> Hi Emile,
>>
>> > During the meeting we decided to move the TCs defined in
>> > draft-stephan-pcc-pcedp-mib-01.txt in a dedicated MIB
>> >  module to permit them to be shared by any (PCE) MIB
>> >  modules;
>>
>> Yes please.
>>
>> > Prior to do that I would like to determine the names of
>> > the PCE MIB modules and the name of the corresponding
>> > drafts. The aim is to avoid collisions in the names of the
>> > MIB modules and drafts, renaming, misunderstanding...
>> > and annoying discussions in the ML for people not
>> > interested by MIB aspects.
>>
>> This is very sensible, to avoid the collisions and any thrashing.
>>
>> It is not so important to avoid the mailing list. I agree that not many
>> people are interetsed in MIB modules, but it is important to make sure
>> that
>> those who might be interested feel that there is a discussion going on
>> that
>> they can contribute to. Also, it is nice to show some interactions about
>> the
>> I-D becuase it helps to build evidence of support for the work.
>>
>> > I identify 3 potential modules plus the TC one:
>> >1- A module to monitor from within a PCC (a PCE may
>> > includes a PCC), the PCEs discovered by this PCC or
>> > PCE (the intend of pcc-pcedp-mib);
>>
>> Right. So this controls and monitors the discovery process, and reports on
>> discovered PCEs.
>> Presumably it also allows you to configure the location and capabilities
>> of
>> remote PCEs.
>>
>> > 2- A module to monitor from within a PCE, path
>> > computation activities of this PCE;
>>
>> Yes. I assume this includes the PCEP activities.
>>
>> > 3- A module to monitor from within a PCC (a
>> > PCE may includes a PCC), path computation
>> > requested by this PCC or PCE;
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> > I propose the 4 following names:
>> >
>> >    MIB module              WG draft name
>> > ========================================
>> >    PCC-PCEDP-MIB           draft-ietf-pce-pcc-pcedp-mib
>> >    PCE-PATHCOMP-MIB        draft-ietf-pce-pce-pathcomp-mib
>> >    PCC-PATHCOMP-MIB        draft-ietf-pce-pcc-pathcomp-mib
>> >    PCE-TC-MIB              draft-ietf-pce-tc-mib
>>
>> Now, I have always had some trouble understanding how MIB modules are
>> supposed to be named, but from experience, it seems that we need...
>>
>> xxx-yyy-STD-MIB
>>
>> ...where
>>
>> xxx is the field of applicability (e.g. MPLS, GMPLS, PCE, etc.)
>> yyy is the thing being modeled.
>> STD means "standard"
>>
>> So this would give us:
>>
>> PCE-DISC-STD-MIB
>> PCE-COMP-STD-MIB
>> PCE-PCC-STD-MIB
>> PCE-TC-STD-MIB
>>
>> The document names are fine as you feel appropriate.
>>
>> Note that you are allowed to put multiple MIB modules in the same I-D, but
>> actually four documents is probably easier for everyone.
>>
>> > The intent of the proposal above is only to start the discussion.
>>
>> Yes. And I very much appreciate it. Thanks for driving this.
>>
>> > We may use shorter names like in ccamp or mpls WG.
>> > What about PCC-DP-MIB, PCE-PC-MIB PCC-PC-MIB
>> > and PCE-TC-MIB?
>>
>> My suggestions, above, are to keep the names looking a little less the
>> same!
>>
>> Alternatives for the middle two of PCE-PCE-STD-MIB and PCE-PCC-STD-MIB
>> just
>> looked too confusing!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Adrian
>>
>>
>
>
> 

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce