RE: INET-Addresses not used in MPLS MIB Modules

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

Possibly. Various people have been fighting over this for 
a while. Seems that the mpls-te-mib has lots of stuff (too
much in some peoples opinion) while te tewg-mib is much
more moderate and claims to address the real important stuff.

At least I have been moderately successfull in trying to get
them to use a common set of TCs.

We'll see where they get.

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: C. M. Heard [mailto:heard@pobox.com]
> Sent: dinsdag 4 februari 2003 4:14
> To: mreview@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: INET-Addresses not used in MPLS MIB Modules
> 
> 
> On Mon, 3 Feb 2003, Mike MacFaden wrote:
> > >I think the two that have a problem right now are:
> > >
> > >   draft-ietf-tewg-mib-03.txt
> > >   draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-09.txt
> > 
> > FWIW, these two MIB modules overlap in what they manage.
> [ ... ]
> > In terms of real products: cisco will implement the former 
> > and Juniper the latter.
> 
> This makes it sound like the MIBs in questions are really
> enterprise MIBs in disguise.
> 
> //cmh
> 
> 
>