[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Personal Invitation to comment on IEEE 802.17 Working Group Ballot
Think about how important the MIB must be to take 1/6th of
the document :)
If the review cannot be done in time for this meeting, we
would certainly welcome comments later. We do have a meeting
scheduled for September 23rd - 25th.
Our goal is to go to sponsor ballot in November.
mike
Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
The MIB section is 'only' a hundred and something pages :-)
-----Original Message-----
From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
Sent: 21 August, 2003 2:27 PM
To: Mreview (E-mail)
Cc: 'tak@cisco.com'; Glenn Parsons
Subject: FW: Personal Invitation to comment on IEEE 802.17
Working Group Ballo t
Sorry for the short notice, but if anyone wants to take a look
at this MIB module, pls do so and send feedback to Glenn and pls
copy the mreview list. Glenn, I hope this OK with you.
If you want access to the PDF file (some 600 pages), then
pls ask Glenn for a user/password. But I think it would be
good enough to just take a look at the MIB itself, which is attached.
Dan Romascanu and I are already checking the MIB as well.
Thanks,
Bert
-----Original Message-----
From: Glenn Parsons [mailto:gparsons@nortelnetworks.com]
Sent: woensdag 13 augustus 2003 17:58
To: 'Thomas Narten'; 'Bert Wijnen'; 'Frank Kastenholz'
Cc: 'tak@cisco.com'
Subject: Personal Invitation to comment on IEEE 802.17 Working Group
Ballo t
Gentlemen,
As I discussed with you at previous IETF meetings, IEEE
802.17 is interested in receiving your comments on the
working group ballot draft of RPR. We are especially
interested in Bert's 'MIB doctor' review of our MIB as his
previous assistance has been very helpful.
As an update, Draft 2.4 of RPR has just passed WG ballot
(similar to IETF WG last call) and is currently in a
'recirculation ballot' before proceeding to sponsor ballot
(similar to IETF last call) in November. The expectation is
that all technical details will be resolved and the sponsor
ballot vote will mainly be a simple approval. This will be
followed by a review by the IEEE REVCOM -- which is often
just a check to ensure that due process was followed. The
bottom line is that standard is stabilizing and is on track
to publish in early 2004.
One of the WG ballot comments that relates to the MIB is
unresolved and besides reviewing the MIB in general, we would
appreciate guidance on this specific comment:
RPR (IEEE 802.17) media counters (that will be implemented in
silicon)
do not count multicast and broadcast packets separately. Is
this a serious
issue? That is, should we re-evaluate counting them separately?
If we do not, how should we map this into the ifMIB which
does count them
separately? Should we:
a) ifInMulticastPkts = RPR multicast + broadcast
ifInBroadcastPkts = 0
b) ifInMulticastPkts = RPR multicast + broadcast
ifInBroadcastPkts = RPR multicast + broadcast
c) ifInMulticastPkts = 0
ifInBroadcastPkts = 0
ifInNUcastPkts = RPR multicast + broadcast
d) ???
The deadline for comments in the first of two recirc ballots
that will be held in the next two months is August 24th. We
would appreciate it if you can forward any comments to us by
this deadline as we will be meeting to resolve the comments
starting on August 26th.
The details on accessing the web page to retreive the PDF of
the draft and the ASCII MIB can be obtained from Glenn. For
your convenience, I have attached the MIB as well.
We look forward to your comments.
Cheers,
Glenn Parsons
OAM Editor & IETF Liaison, IEEE 802.17 Working Group
--
Michael Takefman tak@cisco.com
Manager of Engineering, Cisco Systems
Chair IEEE 802.17 Stds WG
2000 Innovation Dr, Ottawa, Canada, K2K 3E8
voice: 613-254-3399 cell:613-220-6991