Re: SNA NAU WG charter, DLUR and HPR MIB progrss

Joel Halpern <jhalpern@us.newbridge.com> Sat, 10 May 1997 00:26 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa20898; 9 May 97 20:26 EDT
Received: from bubbuh.cisco.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa25769; 9 May 97 20:26 EDT
Received: from wwwnni.us.newbridge.com (wwwnni.us.newbridge.com [204.177.219.11]) by bubbuh.cisco.com (8.8.4-Cisco.1/CISCO.GATE.1.1) with ESMTP id RAA00827 for <snanaumib@external.cisco.com>; Fri, 9 May 1997 17:19:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from herndon-gw1.us.newbridge.com (herndon-gw1 [204.177.219.66]) by wwwnni.us.newbridge.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA10221; Fri, 9 May 1997 20:22:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hernmaster.us.newbridge.com ([138.120.108.6]) by herndon-gw1.us.newbridge.com via smtpd (for wwwnni.us.newbridge.com [204.177.219.11]) with SMTP; 10 May 1997 00:18:51 UT
Received: (from smap@localhost) by hernmaster.us.newbridge.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) id UAA01578; Fri, 9 May 1997 20:18:51 -0400
Received: from mako.us.newbridge.com(138.120.85.99) by hernmaster.us.newbridge.com via smap (V1.3) id sma001576; Fri May 9 20:18:43 1997
Received: from lobster.nni by mako.us.newbridge.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id UAA05102; Fri, 9 May 1997 20:18:00 -0400
Received: by lobster.nni (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA00454; Fri, 9 May 1997 20:16:58 +0500
Date: Fri, 09 May 1997 20:16:58 +0500
From: Joel Halpern <jhalpern@us.newbridge.com>
Message-Id: <9705100016.AA00454@lobster.nni>
To: REMOORE@ralvm6.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: SNA NAU WG charter, DLUR and HPR MIB progrss
Cc: snanaumib@external.cisco.com, rpresuhn@peer.com
X-Sun-Charset: US-ASCII

Thank you.

With regard to the Charter revision, I will try to review it next week, and
pass it on to the IESG assuming that I do not find an unexpected problem.
You may get a security clause added to the charter, but as this is a MIB
working group that should be a minor matter.

With regard to both pending MIB documents, your approach seems correct.
For the dlurmib, get the changes in, and then notify me and
Steve Coya (the IETF Executive Direcotor, scoya@ietf.org) when the
working group comment time expires, and an IETF last call will be 
issued.

With regard to the HRP MIB, you conclusion about the necessary hoops
does seem to be quite correct, if unfortunate.

Thank you very much for the clear statement of the state of the work.

Yours,
Joel M. Halpern				jhalpern@newbridge.com
Newbridge Networks Inc.