Subject: [MIB-DOCTORS] FW: [OPSAWG] NAT-MIB bis

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 10:39:01 +0200

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of Simon Perreault
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2011 11:36 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [OPSAWG] NAT-MIB bis

Hello,

This was just posted:
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-perreault-opsawg-natmib-bis-00

There's been some work on MIBs in BEHAVE lately. There are a number of 
new things that require an update to RFC 4008:
- DS-Lite (shared internal address pools)
- CGNs (thresholds, alarms, statistics, etc.)
- NAT64
and RFC 4008 itself is in need of some polishing independent of those. 
That's why we started a NAT-MIB bis draft.

You can see in section 2 that most of the items are marked TO-DO. We 
will continue working on this draft. At this point we would like some 
early feedback on the worthiness of this effort. Will NAT vendors 
implement this? Do operators need this? Does this make technical sense? 
Text contribution is also very welcome.

As BEHAVE is shutting down, we would like to invite discussion on the 
OPSAWG mailing list. We would like this draft to be adopted by a working

group eventually, and would appreciate guidance on this as well.

Thanks,
Simon
-- 
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca
_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg