RE: FW: EPON MIB comments

Lior,

I think we have a fundamental disagreement on the scope of this document. I
argue that this MIB should only include EPON-specific objects, i.e., objects
that you would not find in any other MIB. This would include statistics for
MPCP messages, LLIDs, and so on. I believe that EPON devices should
implement multiple MIBs: OAM MIB, Bridging MIB, and EPON-specific MIB.
It seems to me that your approach is to define a single MIB that would
include (or duplicate) all objects that *MAY BE* used in EPON, even though
these objects may already have been defined elsewhere. 

For example, counters of transmitted, received, and dropped frames per queue
are not EPON-specific. Any port (according to 802.1D) may have up to 8
queues behind it and would count these statistics. I don't think these
objects belong to EPON-specific MIB.

Before further discussing specific comments, I'd like to ask for a
clarification from the task force on the scope of this document.

Regards,
Glen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lior khermosh [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 11:08 PM
> To: [email protected]; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [Hubmib] FW: EPON MIB comments
> 
> [LK] of course it does not refer to the counters. It refers to the
> queues. The counters are an outcome of these entities.
> As indeed you say they are useful parameters. As it is not defined in
> the EFM MIB objects I added them to the device MIB objects.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> Of Glen Kramer
> Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 3:25 AM
> To: 'Lior khermosh'; 'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [Hubmib] FW: EPON MIB comments
> 
> 
> [GK] Objects eponDeviceStatTxFramesQueue[0-7],
> eponDeviceStatRxFramesQueue[0-7], and
> eponDeviceStatDroppedFramesQueue[0-7]
> are not specific to EPON. These objects exist for other devices, such as
> bridge ports. There is no need to duplicate these objects here. Besides,
> neither 802.3ah nor 802.1D standards require exactly 8 queues to be
> implemented. I recommend removing these objects.
> 
> [LK] The report message in the MPCP refers to such entities. Please see
> section 64.3.6.2 for report message format. These counters refer to
> that.
> 
> [GK] The REPORT message does not refer directly of indirectly to any
> such entities. I attached the clause 64.3.6.2. Would appreciate if you
> could point where and how this clause refers to count of transmitted,
> received, and dropped frames.
> I agree that these are useful parameters. But my point is that they are
> already defined and are not EPON-specific. There is no need to duplicate
> them in this MIB.
> 
> Regards,
> Glen
>