Re: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3728 (1791)

Thanks all of you !

Smadar

________________________________
From: Menachem Dodge [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 14:37
To: Bert Wijnen (IETF); Romascanu, Dan (Dan); RFC Errata System; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; Smadar Tauber
Subject: RE: [Adslmib] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3728 (1791)

Dan,

This is fine with me, as well.

Thank you Smadar, for handling this.

Best Regards,
Menachem

From: Bert Wijnen (IETF) [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 2:33 PM
To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); RFC Errata System; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Menachem Dodge
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Adslmib] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3728 (1791)

I am fine with this new one.

Bert
----- Original Message -----
From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)<mailto:[email protected]>
To: RFC Errata System<mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: [Adslmib] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3728 (1791)

Based on the previous discussions, unless I hear any objections in the
next 24 hours I will approve this Errata Report by entering it in
Verified state.

Dan


> -----Original Message-----
> From: RFC Errata System [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 2:04 PM
> To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; Romascanu, Dan
> (Dan); [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>;
> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> Subject: [Technical Errata Reported] RFC3728 (1791)
>
>
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC3728,
> "Definitions of Managed Objects for Very High Speed Digital
> Subscriber Lines (VDSL)".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata_search.php?rfc=3728&eid=1791
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Smadar Tauber <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
>
> Section: Global
>
> Original Text
> -------------
> UNITS definition of the following MIB objects, should change
> from dBm to dB.
> That will also fix the conflict with the units appearing in
> the Description of these MIB objects (dB).
>
> vdslPhysCurrSnrMgn
> vdslPhysCurrAtn
> vdslLineConfDownMaxSnrMgn
> vdslLineConfDownMinSnrMgn
> vdslLineConfDownTargetSnrMgn
> vdslLineConfUpMaxSnrMgn
> vdslLineConfUpMinSnrMgn
> vdslLineConfUpTargetSnrMgn
>
> Example of original text:
>    vdslPhysCurrSnrMgn OBJECT-TYPE
>        SYNTAX       Integer32 (-127..127)
>        UNITS        "0.25dBm"
>        MAX-ACCESS   read-only
>        STATUS       current
>        DESCRIPTION
>            "Noise Margin as seen by this Vtu with respect to its
>            received signal in 0.25dB.  The effective range is
>            -31.75 to +31.75 dB."
>        REFERENCE    "T1E1.4/2000-009R3, Part 1, common spec"
>         ::= { vdslPhysEntry 5 }
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
> Example of corrected text:
>    vdslPhysCurrSnrMgn OBJECT-TYPE
>        SYNTAX       Integer32 (-127..127)
>        UNITS        "0.25dB"
>        MAX-ACCESS   read-only
>        STATUS       current
>        DESCRIPTION
>            "Noise Margin as seen by this Vtu with respect to its
>            received signal in 0.25dB.  The effective range is
>            -31.75 to +31.75 dB."
>        REFERENCE    "T1E1.4/2000-009R3, Part 1, common spec"
>         ::= { vdslPhysEntry 5 }
>
>
> Notes
> -----
> This Errata replaces errata 1788 (rejected because it did not
> include list of all MIB objects having this problem and could
> not be edited).
> It was decided by the adslmib Forum, that the solution should
> be as described by this Errata.
>
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This errata is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary,
> please use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be
> verified or rejected. When a decision is reached, the
> verifying party (IESG) can log in to change the status and
> edit the report, if necessary.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC3728 (draft-ietf-adslmib-vdsl-12)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : Definitions of Managed Objects for Very
> High Speed Digital Subscriber Lines (VDSL)
> Publication Date    : February 2004
> Author(s)           : B. Ray, R. Abbi
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : ADSL MIB
> Area                : Operations and Management
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG
>
_______________________________________________
Adslmib mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/adslmib
________________________________

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com>
Version: 8.5.339 / Virus Database: 270.12.51/2151 - Release Date: 06/02/09 17:53:00

_______________________________________________
Adslmib mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/adslmib