RE: FW: [psg.com #310] AutoReply: Alarm State Issues

The following is the proposed resolution to entstate-310. The issue 
will be considered closed pending the proposed edit being done.

[Note that the previously proposed edits were done and are reflected in
version -03 of the Entity State MIB. The following is an additional edit on
top of that.]

In the DESCRIPTION of AlarmStatus remove the following text:

"When the value of 'alarmOutstanding' is set, one or more
            alarms is active against the resource. The fault may
            or may not be disabling. This bit provides a high-level
            summary that can be used to determine whether or not
            to examine the rest of the values.  "

And in the enumeration for AlarmStatus, replace:

"
                alarmOutstanding(5),
                -- The following are not defined in X.733
                warning (6),
                indeterminate (7)
                              "

With

"                -- The following are not defined in X.733
                warning (5),
                indeterminate (6)
                              "
Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 11:40 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Entmib] FW: [psg.com #310] AutoReply: Alarm State Issues


Hi

Ok, while I still think it's a useful little bit, if there are not
objections, I'm willing to remove it. Are there any other views on this?

Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 5:52 AM
To: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Entmib] FW: [psg.com #310] AutoReply: Alarm State Issues


On Sun, Feb 15, 2004 at 02:51:56PM -0500, Sharon Chisholm wrote:
 
>              When the value of 'alarmOutstanding' is set, one or more
>              alarms is active against the resource. The fault may or may
>              not be disabling. This bit provides a high-level summary 
> that

>              can be used to determine whether or not to examine the 
> rest
of
>              the values. "

I still fail to understand why we need a bit to summarize 6 other bits in a
single byte. Unless someone can explain what the performance gain is of this
summary bit, I tend to object to having this bit.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

_______________________________________________
Entmib mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib