Subject: [Capwap] The question of OBJECT IDENTIFIER in MIBs

From: young <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 09:45:14 +0800

Hi, 

In the current drafts, OBJECT IDENTIFIER is:

        The MIB module in this document uses the following IANA-assigned
        OBJECT IDENTIFIER values recorded in the SMI Numbers registry:
        Descriptor        OBJECT IDENTIFIER value
        ----------        -----------------------
        capwapBaseMIB  { mib-2 XXX }
 
        Descriptor        OBJECT IDENTIFIER value
        ----------        -----------------------
        capwapDot11MIB  { mib-2 XXX }

In the new drafts, we plan to use the following way to manage OBJECT
IDENTIFIER of

Base MIB and binding MIBs.

mib-2 - capwapMIB - capwapBaseMIB

|   - capwapDot11MIB

        Descriptor        OBJECT IDENTIFIER value
        ----------        -----------------------
        capwapMIB  { mib-2 XXX }

The basic idea is to have a folder capwapMIB to keep base MIB and binding
MIBs.

The advantage is: future binding MIB will be put under same folder as other
one, all

MIB will be well organized.

Whether it is Ok or not?

If it is ok, how to apply OBJECT IDENTIFIER for capwapBaseMIB and
capwapDot11MIB

Under capwapMIB?

Regards

Richard

_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe or modify your subscription options, please visit:
http://lists.frascone.com/mailman/listinfo/capwap

Archives: http://lists.frascone.com/pipermail/capwap

---

From: "David Harrington" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 09:41:17 +0300

Hi,
 
I recommend that you NOT do this.
 
>From RFC4181:
- The value assigned to the MODULE-IDENTITY descriptor MUST be unique
     and (for IETF standards-track MIB modules) SHOULD reside under
the
     mgmt subtree [RFC2578].  Most often it will be an IANA-assigned
     value directly under mib-2 [RFC2578], although for media-specific
     MIB modules that extend the IF-MIB [RFC2863] it is customary to
use
     an IANA-assigned value under transmission [RFC2578].  In the
past,
     some IETF working groups have made their own assignments from
     subtrees delegated to them by IANA, but that practice has proven
     problematic and is NOT RECOMMENDED.

dbh

  _____  

From: young [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 4:45 AM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]; 'Yong Zhang'
Subject: [Capwap] The question of OBJECT IDENTIFIER in MIBs

Hi, 

        The MIB module in this document uses the following
IANA-assigned

|   - capwapDot11MIB

The basic idea is to have a folder capwapMIB to keep base MIB and
binding MIBs.

The advantage is: future binding MIB will be put under same folder as
other one, all

Whether it is Ok or not?

Under capwapMIB?

Regards

Richard

---

From: young <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 13:49:35 +0800

Hi, David:

     Ok.  All MIBs will be an IANA-assigned value directly under mib-2.

    Thanks 

     Richard.

-----邮件原件-----
发件人: David Harrington [mailto:[email-masked]] 
发送时间: 2008年9月25日 14:41
收件人: 'young'; [email-masked]
抄送: [email-masked]; 'Yong Zhang'
主题: RE: [Capwap] The question of OBJECT IDENTIFIER in MIBs

Hi,

- The value assigned to the MODULE-IDENTITY descriptor MUST be unique
     and (for IETF standards-track MIB modules) SHOULD reside under the
     mgmt subtree [RFC2578].  Most often it will be an IANA-assigned
     value directly under mib-2 [RFC2578], although for media-specific
     MIB modules that extend the IF-MIB [RFC2863] it is customary to use
     an IANA-assigned value under transmission [RFC2578].  In the past,
     some IETF working groups have made their own assignments from
     subtrees delegated to them by IANA, but that practice has proven
     problematic and is NOT RECOMMENDED.

dbh

  _____  

Hi, 

 

|   - capwapDot11MIB

Whether it is Ok or not?

Under capwapMIB?

Regards

Richard