Re: VDSL2 draft draft-ietf-adslmib-vdsl2-01.txt
"Clay Sikes" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.adslmib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi, I thought that G.998.1 is commonly used to bond ADSL while G.998.2 via IEEE 802.3ah is commonly used to bond SHDSL and VDSL. Naren, have you looked at the draft-ietf-hubmib-efm-cu-mib-05 for G.998.2/IEEE 802.ah? It does seem like there needs to be a MIB for G.998.1. Regards, Clay On 8/21/2006 6:15 AM, [email protected] wrote: Frank, Shouldn’t we take into consideration ITU-T G.998.1 also, and have one common model for both ATM and Ethernet bonding? Regards Naren ---------- From: [email protected] [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 1:57 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Adslmib] VDSL2 draft draft-ietf-adslmib-vdsl2-01.txt Menachem, The bonding should not be addressed within the VDSL2 MIB. The ITU-T G.998.2 Ethernet bonding standard aplies to SHDSL, ADSL(2)(plus) and VDSL2. It should be addressed separately, as management of a bonding layer on top of the physical layer, hence on top of the VDSL2 MIB, and not as part of it. Regards, Frank [email protected] wrote: Hi, The VDSL2 draft draft-ietf-adslmib-vdsl2-01.txt was posted two weeks ago. I hope that everyone is reviewing this document. There has been no response regarding the xDSL Bonding issue raised two weeks ago. Does this imply no interest? Editors? Anyone? Best Regards, Menachem. ---------- _______________________________________________ Adslmib mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/adslmib ---------- _______________________________________________ Adslmib mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/adslmib _______________________________________________ Adslmib mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/adslmib