RE: IETF NCS Sig MIB draft 6 -> Issue with Epackagerequirements

Hi Randy,


How about we change the objects mentioned specifically as being required
for 'L Package only'? 

David?

regards
Sumanth



Dear all,

In the DESCRIPTION of a number of MIB objects, the term "international
systems" has been replaced by "E package" in draft 6. This introduces
the side-effect that a number of MIB objects that have nothing to do
with E package support, now only have to be supported when the E package
is supported. The following MIB objects are the ones I believe have
nothing to do with the E package, since the caller ID and VMWI
transmissions are triggered using the L package:

pktcSigDevCIDMode
pktcSigDevCIDFskAfterRing
pktcSigDevCIDFskAfterDTAS
pktcSigDevCIDFskAfterRPAS
pktcSigDevCIDRingAfterFSK
pktcSigDevCIDDTASAfterLR
pktcSigDevVmwiFskAfterDTAS
pktcSigDevVmwiFskAfterRPAS
pktcSigDevVmwiDTASAfterLR

An MTA for the international market that does however not support the E
package, will want to support the above MIB objects.

Maybe we can revert to the description of "international systems"?

Thanks,

Regards,

David


Hi -

> From: "Sumanth Channabasappa" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 11:23 AM
> Subject: [ipcdn] IETF NCS Sig MIB draft 6 -> Issue with E 
> packagerequirements
...
> I agree with one of David's old comments to replace 'E Package' with 
> 'International Systems'.
...

I object to using the term "International Systems" without an adequate
definition.  (I raised this issue in an earlier MIB review.) I don't
particularly care what you call it, as long as the term and conformance
requirements are clearly defined.

Randy



_______________________________________________
IPCDN mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn