RE: FWD: Restart ifmib WG?

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Dave, I think it would be good to try and fix that issue of
ifIndex. At the same time it would be good to try and address
the generic issue of referential integrity in MIB modules,
not just ifIndex, but probably many other index objects,
row pointers etc etc. 

Supposedly Randy Presuhn had submitted an individual I-D 
draft-presuhn-referent-00.txt about that topic, but I now
cannot find it. Mmm... Randy... did it actually get submitted?

Anyway, what I am trying to say is that the ifIndex issue you
bring up is part of a bigger issue I think.

Trying to fix it in the current IF-MIB would conflict with the 
first goal that Thomas lists below. And that goal is there, 
becuase we have a few MIB documents that would want to 
advance to full STD but depend on the IF-MIB. In that light,
would you agree that we should try to advance the current 
IF-MIB. And then as a separate effort try to address the
issues of referential integrety?

Thanks,
Bert 

-----Original Message-----
From: Harrington, David [mailto:dbh@enterasys.com]
Sent: dinsdag 12 november 2002 0:23
To: 'Andy Bierman'; Thomas Narten
Cc: mibs@ops.ietf.org
Subject: RE: FWD: Restart ifmib WG?


Hi, 
In July, there was a mibs discussion about the changing nature of ifIndex across reboots, and how that seems to have turned out to be a mistake. 
[I remember the day Keith picked me out of the audience to explain to the ifmib group why allowing ifIndex to be reassigned across reboots would be such a problem for management applications. I'm afraid I offered little support at the time, and have lived to seriously regret it ever since.]
Shouldn't that problem also be addressed in a restarted ifmib effort? 
dbh 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Andy Bierman [mailto:abierman@cisco.com] 
> Sent: Friday, October 04, 2002 12:12 AM 
> To: Thomas Narten 
> Cc: mibs@ops.ietf.org 
> Subject: Re: FWD: Restart ifmib WG? 
> 
> 
> At 01:36 PM 10/2/2002 -0400, Thomas Narten wrote: 
> >I just sent the following message to the ifmib mailing list. 
> Followups 
> >should take place there: 
> > 
> >     General Discussion:ifmib@ietf.org 
> >     To Subscribe:      http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ifmib 
> >     Archive:           ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/ifmib 
> > 
> >Thomas 
> >------- Forwarded Message 
> > 
> >From: Thomas Narten <narten@cichlid.adsl.duke.edu> 
> >To: ifmib@ietf.org 
> >Date: Wed, 02 Oct 2002 13:34:14 -0400 
> >Subject: Restart ifmib WG? 
> > 
> >The ifmib WG still exists on paper, but hasn't been active for some 
> >time. 
> > 
> >There are still (IMO) some important work items that would be good to 
> >get done. For example: 
> > 
> > - advance IF-MIB to full std 
> > - advance inverted stack table mib to DS 
> > 
> >There might be some more possible items, but the above ones are 
> >critical in the sense that there are other documents that can't 
> >advance until the above takes place. 
> > 
> >Who here thinks the above are important to do? And just as important, 
> >are their folk here who would be willing to contribute 
> cycles reviewing 
> >drafts, editing drafts, etc.? 
> > 
> >Are there other work items that should be considered? 
> 
> bug fixes: 
> 
>  - ifTableLastChange should be TimeStamp not TimeTicks 
>  - ifLastChange should be TimeStamp not TimeTicks 
>  - ifStackLastChange should be TimeStamp not TimeTicks 
> 
> optional enhancements: 
> 
>  - ifMtu needs a read-write version 
> 
> the following objects may be available in a different MIB 
> for some media types: 
> 
>  - ifSpeed needs a read-write version 
>  - ifHighSpeed needs a read-write version 
> 
> 
> >Thomas 
> 
> Andy 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >------- End of Forwarded Message 
> 
>