RE: FW: [psg.com #308] AutoReply: Shutting Down Admin St ate

The following is the proposed resolution to entstate-308. The issue 
will be considered closed pending the proposed edit being done.

1. In the DESCRIPTION of entStateUsage, replace

"Note that in the context of a physical entity, this
object refers to an entity's ability to service more"

with

"This object refers to an entity's ability to service more"
                              
2. In the DESCRIPTION of entStateAdmin add the following text

"This object refers to an entities administrative permission 
to service both other entities within its containment hierarchy
as well other users of its services defined by means outside the
scope of this MIB."

[Editor's Note: There used to be text along these lines here at
one point, but it was apparently removed at some point.] 

3. 'testing' has already been added to the operational status in -03.
No further edit is proposed.

4. This should be covered by the text in section 2.1. No further edit 
is proposed.

Sharon


-----Original Message-----
From: Chisholm, Sharon [CAR:0S00:EXCH] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 8:35 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Entmib] FW: [psg.com #308] AutoReply: Shutting Down Admin St
ate


hi

Ok, here is probably a better summary of the issues from Dave's email.

1. Language nit: Is it appropriate to describe the interpretation of these
objects in the context of physical entities considering the entire MIB, with
the exception of the Textual Conventions, is just talking about physical
entities?

2. Given the definition of Usage and Admin, it is not clear how to apply
'shuttingDown'. [Note there is also discussion about redesigning the TC, but
it is not clear to me what problem that is trying to solve]

3. Not sure how to map the concept of interface status of 'testing' into
this model.

4. There is discussion again about containment hierarchy and state and what
the relationships.

Sharon