Draft-ietf-bridge-bridgemib-smiv2 Issues Resolution

Hi,

I have reviewed the -08- revision to see which WG Last Call issues
were resolved. Here is a summary of the issues and their resolution.
These issues have been discussed on the mailing list, and I believe
the changes reflect consensus.
If nobody raises a serious objection to any change, I will close these
issues. 
We have only one issue remaining from the WG Last Call.

-----------------------
EDITORIAL ISSUES

#758: smiv2-07: Is the BridgeId description still correct? it is not
clear that the definition is wrong. The question has been posed
publicly and nobody, including the co-chair of 802.1, responded that
it was in fact wrong. I would only like to see corrected text
submitted if this is in fact WRONG. Issue closed.

#759: rstpMIB registration. This issue is purely editorial, and the
presence or non-presence of the comment in this document is
immaterial. Editor's choice. Issue closed.

#761 portPathCost32 description - The inaccuracy is editorial, and
immaterial to the functionality of the object. No improved text has
been provided. Issue closed. 

#762: smiv2-07: unit of dot1dTpPortMaxInfo; done. Issue closed

#764 add original authors in contact information. Publicly requested
updated addresses. Done where the info was available. I suggest we
simply submit with the **missing data here** comment in -08-; this way
the author is still credited, and we do not provide inaccurate contact
info for those persons. Purely editorial. Issue closed.  

Other editorial changes:
1) "group" was changed to "subtree" througout.

-----------------------
TECHNICAL ISSUES

#757 forward reference in MODULE-IDENTITY: two proposals; either
works; editor's choice. Issue closed.

#669: smiv2-07: compliance requirements for 32-bit pathcost; and
#760 smiv2-07 changing bridgeCompliance and bridgeCompliance2: 
The description in PathCost was changed in a way that maintains
compliance for existing implementations, and tweaks the semantics of
the value 65535 for those implementations that also support
PathCost32. It almost looks legal. Precedence for this approach is
found in IF-MIB. The bridgeCompliance was renamed to
bridgeCompliance1493 and made current, and a new compiance was added
for implementations that support PathCost32. Issues closed.

-----------------------
UNRESOLVED ISSUES:

#543: smiv2-06: semantic changes; the following objects changed
semantics of an existing object: dot1dPortPriority,
dot1dStpTimeSinceTopologyChange, and dot1dStaticAllowedToGoTo. These
objects were modified to support 802.1t semantics. Since 802.1t
implementations have been fielded before this mib becomes available,
the behavior of current agent implementations might be non-compliant
with the updated definitions. Even an implementation that claims
compliance to bridgeCompliance1493 will be impacted because the
semantics of objects from RFC 1493 have been changed. 


David Harrington
[email protected]
co-chair, IETF Bridge WG