X.25 MIB Comments

Rodney L Thayer <rodney@world.std.com> Tue, 30 June 1992 22:44 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07876; 30 Jun 92 18:44 EDT
Received: from NRI.NRI.Reston.Va.US by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07872; 30 Jun 92 18:44 EDT
Received: from dg-rtp.rtp.dg.com by NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa00598; 30 Jun 92 18:45 EDT
Received: from relay2.UU.NET by dg-rtp.dg.com (5.4.1/dg-rtp-proto) id AA23435; Tue, 30 Jun 1992 18:23:07 -0400
Received: from world.std.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP (5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AA02111; Tue, 30 Jun 92 18:22:54 -0400
Received: by world.std.com (5.61+++/Spike-2.0) id AA26170; Tue, 30 Jun 92 18:22:44 -0400
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1992 18:22:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Rodney L Thayer <rodney@world.std.com>
Subject: X.25 MIB Comments
To: x25mib@dg-rtp.dg.com
Message-Id: <Pine.2.4.9206301826.A25950@world.std.com>

Unless my mailer corrupted it both part 1 and part 2 of what you just
mailed were in fact part 1.  Anybody else have this problem?
And, a real comment:

Could we allow a 'none of the above' object for x25ProtocolVersion?  I've
got several not-quite-standard X.25's I would like to use this on and I
do not want to return misleading information.

Otherwise it looks good, and, yes, I'm planning to implement this soon so
I really care if it's reasonable...

 On Fri, 26 Jun 1992, Dean D. Throop wrote:

> I'll be sending out an updated X.25 MIB in the following two 
> messages.  This draft changes the ranges of the X.25 Logical Channel 
> Numbers to 0..4095.  I believe this should finish the MIB but just 
> for formalities I'm restart the review period (We'll make sure we 
> do it right).  If comments are not received in two weeks, this will 
> indicate the working group is satisfied with the MIB and considers 
> it finished.  Again no comments by July 10th indicates acceptance of 
> the MIB as it stands.  
> Dean Throop		throop@dg-rtp.dg.com