RE: AD (MIB Dcotor) review of: draft-ietf-ipcdn-bpiplus-mib-11.txt
"Eduardo Cardona" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ipcdn |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Thanks Jean-Francois,
I Agree the vendors read all specs RFI, BPI, OSSI to implement the protocols and BPI MIBs
I will use your proposed wording with some sligth variations.
Some additional comments below the --- section ---
-----------------------------
To your suggestion:
- Remove the must statements to make that informational and refer to the specs
- Because the title BPI+ vs BPI MIBs, your text does not really refers to
BPI MIBs relationships just BPI specs (?),
- Also the reference to RFC 3083 in Appendix F of BPI+ spec
is not cited in the spec text (our fault), so, BPI+ spec does not reference
to BPI MIB (CM requirements) when OSSI does, so I added a couple of
references in your text to close the loop.
Please suggest any changes you would like
Proposed text:
2.2 Relationship between BPI+ and BPI MIBs
This section describes the relationship between the BPI+ MIB module defined in this document and the BPI MIB module defined in RFC 3083 [RFC3083]. The BPI+ protocol interface is an enhancement to the BPI protocol and it is a distinct protocol from BPI. The associated BPI+ managed objects should be considered separate from the BPI MIB objects defined in RFC 3083.
DOCSIS 1.1 and 2.0 systems implement both BPI+ and BPI protocols to be backward compatible with 1.0 systems. For more information regarding the interoperability between BPI and BPI+ systems, refer to appendix C of [1] and for MIB modules requirements, refers to section 4.6.1, Figure 9 of [3] and 7.6.1, Table 7-9 of [4]
------------------------------
More notes:
The operational mode (config file) defines the BPI protocol to support, as an example a 1.1/2.0 CM support both BPI and BPI+ protocols and because a 1.1/2.0 CM in a 1.0 CMTS, the CMTS only knows BPI and won't understand BPI+ capabilities in the REG-REQ message.
The initial proposed text is the complete matrix of combinations for mib implementation, and I agree that a reader will have a terrible headacke reading that, with no more options that going to the specs.
The problem is summarized as :
Graphically is more digestable
Indeed mode of operation (
config file for (1.0 operational mode style) 1.1 and 2.0 CM will load all BPI MIB and ( SSD of BPI+ )
Config file for (1.1 operational mode style) 1.1 and 2.0 CM will load all BPI+ only
*SSD (secure Software Download only for 1.1/2.0 systems) is not really part of the BPI+ protocol, but it is a security feature of DOCSIS, which is the only security spec available in DOCSIS, then SSD was incorporated to BPI+ spec and MIBs.
see OSSIv1.1
http://www.cablemodem.com/downloads/specs/SP-OSSIv1.1-I07-030730.pdf
4.6.1 Coexistence and MIBs
Figure 9. CM DOCSIS Mode and MIBs Requirement
Or in OSSIv2.0 spec
http://www.cablemodem.com/downloads/specs/SP-OSSIv2.0-I04-030730.pdf
Section 7.6.1 Coexistence and MIBs
Table 7-9 DOCSIS 2.0 CM Modes and MIB Requirements
-----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Francois Mule
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2003 4:14 PM
To: Eduardo Cardona; Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Ipcdn (E-mail)
Subject: RE: [ipcdn] AD (MIB Dcotor) review of: draft-ietf-ipcdn-bpiplus-mib-11.txt
Eduardo,
A quick comment regarding the relationship between the BPI+ and BPI MIB modules.
If you decide to add some informative text to explain it, I would recommend keeping it short and only stating the compliance in terms of DOCSIS 1.0/1.1/2.0, see more below. The considerations on operational modes - even though it is valuable information - are outside any implementation consideration for this MIB and they are a given due to the fact that a 2.0 CM can run in 1.0 mode and this depends on operator config & CMTS.
Refer to appendix C of the BPI+ specification (a normative ref) for more details on interop between bpi and bpi+.
You wrote:
... snipped
> 2.2 MIB Module implementation
How about a single section called "Relationship between BPI+ and BPI MIBs"
> This section describe the overall implementation framework of
> BPI+ MIB module to clarify the relation with BPI MIB
> [RFC3083]. BPI/BPI+ MIB requirements depends both on the
> device specification compliance and additionally for CM, of
> its DOCSIS operational mode when connected to a partcular CMTS type
The pb I have with this sentence is that the actual CM requirements (what a CM must implement) do not depend on the operational mode.
>
> 2.2.1 DOCSIS Specification Compliance Classification
> DOCSIS currently defines three kinds of interoperable
> specification compliance devices based on the DOCSIS RFI
> specifications: DOCSIS 1.0 CM/CMTS defined in [3] DOCSIS 1.1
> CM/CMTS defined in [4] DOCSIS 2.0 CM/CMTS defined in [5]
>
> 2.2.2 DOCSIS Operational Modes
>
> DOCSIS operational mode refers to the CM specification
> compliance set of functionalities and the interoperability
> requirements to connect to a specific CMTS type (2.0, 1.1,
> 1.0). In general this document calls DOCSIS 1.1 mode a
> configuration where a DOCSIS 2.0/1.1 CM can interoperate with
> a 1.1 CMTS; in the same way, a DOCSIS 1.0 mode is a
> configuration where a DOCSIS 2.0/1.1/1.0 CM can interoperate
> with a 1.0 CMTS. In the CMTS side a 2.0 CMTS can support
> simultaneously CMs configured in either DOCSIS 2.0, 1.1 or
> 1.0 mode. For the scope of the
> BPI+ requirements DOCSIS 2.0 mode is equivalent to DOCSIS 1.1 mode (*)
>
>
> 2.2.3 BPI/BPI+ MIB implementation:
The section below is very confusing and I strongly recommend to reference the BPI+ spec without trying to put too much details in the MIB. MIB implementers will have to read the spec (hopefully ;).
>
> Based on CM perational modes and CM/CMTS specification
> compliances below is a summary of Baseline Privacy Interface
> MIB modules requirements (BPI and BPI+) 1. DOCSIS 1.0
> CM/CMTS only implements BPI MIB per [6],
> 2. DOCSIS 2.0 and 1.1 CMTS only implements BPI+ MIB per [8]
> and[7] respectively
> 3. DOCSIS 2.0 and 1 1 CM in DOCSIS 1.0 mode implements BPI MIB
> plus the BPI+ MIB objects associated with Authentication of
> Downloaded Images
> 4. DOCSIS 2.0 and 1.1 CM in DOCSIS 1.1 mode (*) implements only
> BPI+ MIB
> 5. DOCSIS 2.0 and 1.1 CM BPI MIB requirements are in [8] and [7]
> respectively
How about something like this:
------------
2.2 Relationship between BPI+ and BPI MIBs
This section describes the relationship between the BPI+ MIB module defined in this document and the BPI MIB module defined in RFC 3083 [RFC3083]. The BPI+ protocol interface is an enhancement to the BPI protocol and it is a distinct protocol from BPI. The associated BPI+ managed objects should be considered separate from the BPI MIB objects defined in RFC 3083.
DOCSIS 1.1 and 2.0 systems must implement the BPI+ specification. For more information regarding the interoperability between BPI and BPI+ systems, refer to appendix C of the BPI+ specification [xxx].
------------
Jean-François
_______________________________________________
IPCDN mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn