Subject: [Entmib] WG Last Call: Entity State MIB

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 08:35:34 -0400

This is an Entity MIB working group last call for comments on advancing the 
following
document as a Proposed Standard:

	Title		: Entity State MIB
	Author(s)	: S. Chisholm, D. Perkins
	Filename	: draft-ietf-entmib-state-01.txt
	Pages		: 22
	Date		: June 2003

The document can be found at:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-entmib-state-01.txt

Please send substantive comments to the entmib mailing list, and minor 
editorial
comments to the authors.  This last call period will end on 22-July-2003.

Margaret Wasserman
Entity MIB WG Chair

_______________________________________________
Entmib mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 12:02:53 -0400

Hi All,

I was just reminded that it is usual to add a week to last calls
that go over an IETF meeting, so I'd like to extend this last
call until 29-July-03.

Thanks,
Margaret

At 08:35 AM 7/8/2003 -0400, Margaret Wasserman wrote:

>This is an Entity MIB working group last call for comments on advancing 
>the following

---

From: Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2003 12:02:53 -0400

Hi All,

Thanks,
Margaret

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 16:06:07 +0200

>>>>> Margaret Wasserman writes:

Margaret> This is an Entity MIB working group last call for comments
Margaret> on advancing the following document as a Proposed Standard:

I have read draft-ietf-entmib-state-01.txt and I generally like this
document. Below are some comments, many of them are editorial, others
ask for more discussion of relationships to other MIBs. But I also
understand that this can be done later when the document is revised.

a) Typo in section 2: "so this term us substituted".

b) Typo in section 2.1: "interesting issues not addresses in existing work"

c) Typo in section 2.2: "It also compare this combination of states"

d) state 'lock' for entStateAdmin of a container?

e) entStatAdmin is actually entStateAdmin

f) state 'active' for entStateUsage of a power supply?

g) state 'active' for entStateUsage of a fan?

h) Relationship of the entState* objects to the dot1dStpPortEnable of
   the BRIDGE-MIB?

i) Relationship of the entState* objects to the hrDeviceStatus of
   the HOST-RESOURCES-MIB?

j) Relationship of the entState* objects to the objects using the 
   SubUnitStatus TC of the Printer-MIB?

k) Is my understanding correct that alarmOutstanding(5) of the
   AlarmStatus TC is set when at least one of critical(2), major(3),
   minor(4), warning(6), indeterminate(7) is set? If not, the
   explanation can probably improved. ;-)

l) Implementation of the notifications is unconditionally optional?

m) In the security section, you may want to explain that access to the
   objects defined in this MIB allows to figure out what the active
   and standby resources in a network are and that this information
   can be used to optimize attacks on networks. So even read-only
   access to this MIB should be properly protected.

y) In general, the description of the states for each combination of
   entity class and state value is incomplete (see d,e,f above). What
   is the interpretation of combinations not mentioned in the text?
   Are such combinations simply undefined but not illegal or are they
   illegal?

Overall, I like this very much. A simple but highly useful addition
to the ENTITY-MIB.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

---

From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2003 16:06:07 +0200

/js