RE: [EFM] RE: EFM MIB Internet-Drafts, WG Meetings

Hi Matt,
 
Thanks very much for your EFM MIB proposal.  I have a few comments,
editorial and technical.
 
You use both "Ethernet like" and "Ethernet-like" - I think the latter is
better.
 
dot3OamUnidirectionalSupport: could you give an example of when it might be
good to be able to write this?  Seems to me perhaps better as read-only.
 
dot3OamParserState: in the Description there is a cut-and-paste error: it
says "multiplexor" but should say "parser".
 
dot3OamPeerEntry: somehow the Description needs to mention that the
information relates to the Peer.
 
dot3OamPeerVendorInfo: Error in 802.3ah! (30.11.1.1.12 D2.1 refers to table
57-10, but should refer to table 57-11).
 
What about traps?  Is it usual to define a set of traps, which in this case
might correspond with the OAM Events, and traps based on the important bits
in the OAM Flags field (critical event, dying gasp, link fault).
 
You have included a commented-out block of config variables for the
parameters associated with error reporting.  If we have OAM Event traps,
then we may need these config variables, otherwise probably not I feel.
 
Regards,
    -- John
John Messenger ([email protected]) 
R&D Manager, Software 
ADVA Optical Networking Ltd. 
+44-1904-699309 
www.advaoptical.com 

-----Original Message-----
From: Matt Squire [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: 23 October 2003 15:01
To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: [EFM] RE: [Hubmib] EFM MIB Internet-Drafts, WG Meetings


 
Just speaking for the draft I submitted, it is a very early draft that still
has a lot of holes.  All input is very appreciated.  
 
In particular, one big nagging question is how these new MIBs are organized
within the existing MIB heirarchy.  For the common stuff, does it get a new
mib-2 branch, or do we somehow hang it under the dot3 branch as something
under the Ethernet tree?  
 
Hoping some of you MIB experts can lend some guidance.