Subject: Re: dot3Tests

From: "Dan Romascano LAN-Tel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 13:25:35 +0200

John,

> In working on the update to the Ethernet-like MIB, I'm not sure how to
> handle the references to the ifTestTable.  The updated IF-MIB
> deprecates this table.  There was a replacement being defined in a
> separate document (draft-ietf-ifmib-testmib-xx.txt), but I am not sure
> what the status of this document is.  Meanwhile, I am faced with
> updating this document containing test types, with no current test
> mechanism to refer to.
> 
> In addition, I noticed the description of dot3TestTdr in RFC 1650
> refers to the dot3TestTdrValue object for holding the result.  This
> object existed in RFC 1284, but was removed from RFC 1398 and is not
> present in RFC 1650.  Where should the result
> go?

We were chartered with adding the specific 100 MB objects to the 
Ethernet-like MIB, in order to make it workable for the 100M technology. 
The quote from our Charter is:

'The working group is further chartered to define an SNMP MIB for the 
management of the 100Base-T hubs, MAUs and
interfaces, or to propose aditions / changes to existing MIB modules that 
deal with IEEE 802.3 hubs, MAUs or interfaces in
order to extend their support to 100Base-T.'

The reason we decided on such an approach was that two years ago, the 
Ethernet-like MIB looked like a stable work, ar Draft Standard, whose 
advancement we did not want to hold in place. If the Ethernet-like MIB is 
no longer workable, because of the evolutions in the ifTestTable, this 
looks like a broader problem, that we cannot approach without the 
cooperation of the if-mib guys. Their latest shot on this is 
draft-ietf-ifmib-testmib-03.txt, but I am not sure what is the status. 
One solution would be that we do our job (defining the 100 MB objects) 
and link the release of the MIB with a package that would include the 
Test MIB, an updated Ethernet-like interfaces MIB and the 100 MB 
additions that you are writing. In any case, let us have their advice, I 
cc-ed the if-mib list on this message.

Dan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Dan Romascanu,
Systems Architecture Team Manager,
Enterprise LAN Systems,
Madge Networks (Israel) Ltd.,
Voice: 972-3-645-8414, e-mail: [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------

---

From: "Dan Romascano LAN-Tel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 13:25:35 +0200

John,

Dan

---

From: "Dan Romascano LAN-Tel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 13:25:35 +0200

John,

Dan

---

From: John Flick <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 21:40:56 -0800 (PST)

> order to extend their support to 100Base-T.'

However, this is a standards track document, and needs to be
compatible with other existing standards track documents.  In
particular, since we are an media-specific MIB for an interface, we
need to make sure that we relate to the current version of the
interface MIB correctly.

 > advancement we did not want to hold in place.

Actually, there are 2 versions of the Ethernet-like MIB currently on
the standards track:  RFC 1643, which uses the V1 SMI and is at Full
Standard, and RFC 1650, which uses the V2 SMI and is at Proposed
Standard.  We decided to roll the 100Mbit changes into RFC 1650, since
we would only be changing a Proposed Standard MIB.  Note that if it
were at draft, we almost certainly would not be allowed to be adding
new MIB objects.

 > If the Ethernet-like MIB is 
 > cooperation of the if-mib guys.

For now, I have taken the approach of adding the following paragraph
to the end of the ifTestTable section (section 4.2.3):

   "Note that the ifTestTable is now deprecated.  Work is underway to
   define a replacement MIB for system and interface testing.  It is
   expected that the tests defined in this document will be usable in
   this replacement MIB."

John

---

From: John Flick <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 1997 21:40:56 -0800 (PST)

John