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

> Thanks very much for your EFM MIB proposal.  I have a few comments, editorial and technical.

Thanks a bunch.  

> You use both "Ethernet like" and "Ethernet-like" - I think the latter is better.

Can do.

> 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.

Probably right. I couldn't justify it when I wrote it.  

> dot3OamParserState: in the Description there is a cut-and-paste error: it says "multiplexor" but should say "parser".

Will fix. 

> dot3OamPeerEntry: somehow the Description needs to mention that the information relates to the Peer.

Can do.

> dot3OamPeerVendorInfo: Error in 802.3ah! (30.11.1.1.12 D2.1 refers to table 57-10, but should refer to table 57-11).

There's a comment cycle open, so hopefully one of us can log this.

> 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).

Yea, I wasnt sure at the time what to do with events (which is why I skipped that part the first go-round).  My expectation is that there will be a set of traps defined for the events.  It just gets tricky when you have non-standard events happening.  I assume I'll end up defining a "organization specific trap" for each of the organization specific event. 

>  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.

Agreed.  Since I didn't fill in the event part, I felt it was premature to include the other part.  But I also didn't want to delete and forget it.  So its there commented out.  But it will (hopefully) be consistent and uncommented in the next revision.