RE: draft-ietf-adslmib-gbond-mib-00.txt

 Dan,

Since the HUBMIB and the ADSLMIB are sharing modules for various
solutions, would not it be a good idea to have a shared applicability
draft explaining how to handle the MIB modules of the two groups for the
various solutions?

Orly

-----Original Message-----
From: Edward Beili [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 17:04
To: Uri Shabi; Menachem Dodge
Cc: [email protected]; Moti Morgenstern; [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Adslmib] draft-ietf-adslmib-gbond-mib-00.txt

Uri,
1. You are right, current definition of ifSpeed is only correct for the
Ethernet service. I'll correct it in the next revision.

2. EFM-CU-MIB covers management of 2BASE-TL (G.SHDSL based) and
10PASS-TS (VDSL based) defined in IEEE 802.3ah, including both physical
layer and bonding. The WG Last Call was just sent for this MIB. ITU-T
998.2 takes the bonding as defined in 802.3ah but allows it to be used
on any xDSL technology. Therefore GBOND-MIB and GBOND-ETH-MIB would
cover just the bonding management, leaving physical layer management to
corresponding xDSL LINE MIBs.

3. WT-157 can be downloaded from the DSL Forum website (restricted to
the forum members only). Note that this is work in progress, don't
expect it to be complete.

Menachem, is there an area on the workgroup site where I can put this
document for group download?

Regards,
-E.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Uri Shabi [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 17:45
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Adslmib] draft-ietf-adslmib-gbond-mib-00.txt
> 
> Hi all,
> I was not involved in your MIB process until now and would like to 
> give my comments,
> 
> 1. para 4.1.5 ifSpeed section reads the following:
> "For the GBS it is the sum of the current operating data rates of all 
> BCEs in the aggregation group, without the encapsulation overhead and 
> G.Bond overhead, but accounting for the Inter-Frame Gaps (IFG)"
> As I understand the IFG refers to Ethernet medium but the GBS of type
> g9981&3 are not Ethernet.
> 
> 2. Looking at the G.998.2 and 802.3ah EFM bonding, these are almost 
> the same thing. AS I understand on the MIB progress, there are the 
> EFM-Cu and the GBOND-ETH, why to do two MIBs and not keep with a 
> single one?
> 
> 3. Where can I get WT-157?
> 
> Appreciate your comments, Uri.
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Adslmib mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/adslmib
>