Re: draft-ietf-entmib-sensor-mib-02.txt

At 07:09 AM 10/6/2002 -0400, Margaret Wasserman wrote:

>Hi Bob,
>
>The sensor MIB has already been approved by the IESG for publication
>as a Proposed Standard RFC.  So, it is too late in the process to
>make editorial or non-critical changes to the document.  I have looked
>through your proposed changes, and they appear to be editorial in
>nature.
>
>If you believe that the issues that you have raised represent serious
>technical problems that would make it difficult to implement this MIB
>and/or use it for its primary purpose, please explain further.

I would be willing to make these changes and get a new version
out within 2 weeks.  The only changes would be:
   - change 'entSensor' to 'entPhySensor' in all relevant descriptors
   - update K.C.'s contact information

I realize there will be some delay added, but we should not have to
go through another WG Last Call for these changes.


>Thanks,
>Margaret

Andy




>At 09:15 PM 10/4/02, Bob Burget wrote:
>>Dear IETF Working Group;
>>
>>I have recently become aware that a new MIB for physical sensors,
>>(as defined by an entPhysicalClass value of 'sensor(8)') has been
>>proposed for the IETF standards track.
>>
>>I request that the MIB text be modified to include some indication
>>in the object descriptors that this MIB is for Physical entities.
>>I hope to ensure that the relationship between the proposed MIB
>>and the entPhysicalTable in the ENTITY-MIB is clarified.
>>A similar case for reference is the existing entPhysicalContainsTable
>>which also has the entPhysicalIndex as its INDEX.
>>
>>Attached is a text file that shows how this can be done.
>>Please let me know if there would be any problems with this.
>>
>>   Thanks,
>>
>>--
>>   Bob Burget, [email protected]
>
>_______________________________________________
>Entmib mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib