Subject: Re: snmpconfig Re: Work on the Diff Serv Policy MIB

From: Andrew Smith <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 16:06:48 -0800

I hope I am not too late to catch this departing thread - the list and WG
were only publicly announced today so I hope not too many decisions have
been made already in everyone's absence - I would suggest that the WG chairs
send a recap message as to where we are today with proposed documents and
authors/editors since this is the first official day of public operation of
this WG.

I am confused about the value of a MIB with "BCP" status. Surely this should
be either standards'-track or informational. [Are there other instances of
BCP MIBs?]. 

Assuming that this should be a standards'track MIB, then I too do not see
the point of having 2 WGs working on the same thing: as John Seligson
pointed out, it is an explicit goal of the PIB syntax being developed in the
RAP WG  and the specific QoS PIB work item that the DiffServ WG has taken
up, to have the PIB document machine-translatable into a QoS policy
configuration MIB.

It seems like there is an inconsistency forming here - the deliverable #3 of
this WG really ought to be a work item for the DiffServ WG, not this one,
according to principles espoused by both Scott Bradner and Bert Wijnen over
the last few months.

Andrew

P.S. Procedural note for Steve Coya - when an announcement about a proposed
new WG goes out, it does not mention which forum is appropriate for
discussion and development of the WG's charter: thus, the first few months
of any WGs task is often devoted to charter discussions such as my points
above. In this instance, AFAIK, no BoF was held on the topic of this new WG
(the conf-mgmt BoF and its associated design team, is on a related topic
but, as Bert pointed out to me in a private email, this is still in
operation and is focusing on development of requirements, not solutions)
and, based on my reading of the minutes of the by-invitation-only meeting in
Chicago last September, there was really no clear consensus that a WG on
SNMP-based configuration was the appropriate next step.

****************************************************************
Andrew Smith                              tel: +1 (408) 579-2821
Extreme Networks                          fax: +1 (408) 579-3000
3585 Monroe St.                   http://www.extremenetworks.com
Santa Clara CA 95051-1450         em: [email-masked]
****************************************************************

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2000 15:58:16 -0500
From: Jon Saperia <[email-masked]>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 (Macintosh; U; PPC)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: John Seligson <[email-masked]>
CC: snmpconfig <[email-masked]>, Aiko Pras <[email-masked]>,
        David Partain <[email-masked]>,
        TSS management group <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Subject: Re: snmpconfig Re: Work on the Diff Serv Policy MIB

... Bottom line we are not duplicating the work of the
DiffServ MIB that is instance level information ours, like the PIB will
be policy based. In that sense our MIB is a duplication of the policy
PIB. The BCP will cover protocol operations, mib design, and perhaps
even configuration suggestions for notifications.

/jon