Feedback on CU MIB
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.hubmib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Edward, I had a look on the MIB. Here is ome feedback on that Section 3.1, foruth line it says'The stack management in done via ...' I guess you mean 'is' done .. Section 3.1.1 This section is tough and I believe that is the key section. Knowing the technical background I know what your're talking about (see attached drawing, which contains an example). If all my assumptions are correct I would suggest the following: 1. Add a schematic drawing and show the values of the different tables (or is this not the intention of the RFC) 2. Add that after reset and no PAF discovery both ifstacktable and infinvstacktable are empty Section 3.1.3. Chapter 'Adding a PME to the ifstacktable...' There you're saying that a successful discovery automatically puts it to the PME aggregate -> is this really the intention? Section 3.1.4 seems to be written in the same way, if links can be aggregated, they will be aggregated Section 3.4 different objects for -O and -R devices - Clause 45 has a respective mechanism to distinct both types. From an application point of view, especially for SHDSL it doesn't seem to make sense, but the DMT people should decide on this (so based on thi statement, I guess it is good to have it, where I would expect that it will only be used by VDSL Table 2 contains 2 times aPAFID in the elxt column (and the same mapping in the right column) I'm still working on all the different variables, but I also wanted to share my ideas with you and the community. Regards Mathias <<object_mapping.pdf>> _______________________________________________ Hubmib mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hubmib
object_mapping.pdf
(application/octet-stream, 7.2 KB) - not displayed