Subject: [ipcdn] pktcSigPowerRingFrequency description change

From: Beacham Gordon-CGB005 <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:47:42 -0700

The following changes are recommended to the description of the pktcSigPowerRingFrequency object.
 
delete: DEFVAL { f20Hz }
add: This default value for this object MUST be f20Hz for MTAs compliant to [PKT-SP-MIB-SIG]. The default value for this object MUST be f25Hz for MTAs compliant to [ITU-T-J169].
 
Gordon
_______________________________________________
IPCDN mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn

---

From: Beacham Gordon-CGB005 <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:58:04 -0700

Slight grammar fix: Change first "This" to "The" in first "add:" sentence. Gordon

-----Original Message-----
From: Beacham Gordon-CGB005 
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 8:48 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]'
Subject: pktcSigPowerRingFrequency description change

delete: DEFVAL { f20Hz }
 
Gordon

---

From: "Eugene Nechamkin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:50:14 -0700

While not disagreeing with the proposal to delete the DEFVAL clause from
the MIB Object definition, I am not completely comfortable with the fact
that IETF MIB draft would make a reference to the document
([PKT-SP-MIB-SIG]) which will be obsolete when draft becomes an RFC (or
soon thereafter). Besides, I am not sure to which extent the mentioning
of compliency with the [PKT-SP-MIB-SIG] or with the [ITU-T-J169] is
unambigous. Not sure presisely what this "compliency" means. What's the
intention here - to say that for MTAs compliant with NorthAmerican-PC
the defval should be f20 but for MTAs compliant with Euro-PC the defval
should be f25Hz ? I think the reference to the compliency should be made
less ambiguous. 
 
Eugene.

________________________________

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf
Of Beacham Gordon-CGB005
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 8:48 AM
To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]'
Subject: [ipcdn] pktcSigPowerRingFrequency description change

The following changes are recommended to the description of the
pktcSigPowerRingFrequency object.
 
delete: DEFVAL { f20Hz }
add: This default value for this object MUST be f20Hz for MTAs compliant
to [PKT-SP-MIB-SIG]. The default value for this object MUST be f25Hz for
MTAs compliant to [ITU-T-J169].
 
Gordon

---

From: "Eugene Nechamkin" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:46:30 -0700

Yes, this addresses my conserns.
 
Eugene.

From: Sumanth Channabasappa [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 11:03 AM
To: Eugene Nechamkin; Beacham Gordon-CGB005; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [ipcdn] pktcSigPowerRingFrequency description change

Hi Eugene,

How about:
 
"The default value for this object is dependent on the primary usage
area of the device. For devices compliant with PacketCable (North
America)  it MUST be set to f20Hz and for devices compliant with
IPCablecom (Europe)  it MUST be set to f25Hz."

Sumanth

	-----Original Message-----
	From: Eugene Nechamkin [mailto:[email-masked]] 
	Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 11:50 AM
	To: Beacham Gordon-CGB005; [email-masked]; Sumanth Channabasappa
	Subject: RE: [ipcdn] pktcSigPowerRingFrequency description
change

	While not disagreeing with the proposal to delete the DEFVAL
clause from the MIB Object definition, I am not completely comfortable
with the fact that IETF MIB draft would make a reference to the document
([PKT-SP-MIB-SIG]) which will be obsolete when draft becomes an RFC (or
soon thereafter). Besides, I am not sure to which extent the mentioning
of compliency with the [PKT-SP-MIB-SIG] or with the [ITU-T-J169] is
unambigous. Not sure presisely what this "compliency" means. What's the
intention here - to say that for MTAs compliant with NorthAmerican-PC
the defval should be f20 but for MTAs compliant with Euro-PC the defval
should be f25Hz ? I think the reference to the compliency should be made
less ambiguous. 
	 
	Eugene.

	From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of Beacham Gordon-CGB005
	Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 8:48 AM
	To: [email-masked]; [email-masked]'
	Subject: [ipcdn] pktcSigPowerRingFrequency description change

	delete: DEFVAL { f20Hz }
	add: This default value for this object MUST be f20Hz for MTAs
compliant to [PKT-SP-MIB-SIG]. The default value for this object MUST be
f25Hz for MTAs compliant to [ITU-T-J169].
	 
	Gordon

---

From: "Sumanth Channabasappa" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:05:35 -0600

Hi Harrie,

I think it is a worthwhile suggestion. 

How about -

Remove DEFVAL and add:

"The default value for this object is dependent on the primary usage
area of the device.  For example: Devices compliant with PacketCable
(North America) require a default value of f20Hz; devices 
compliant with IPCablecom (Europe) require a default value of f25Hz."

Sumanth

Hi,

> IPCablecom (Europe)  it MUST be set to f25Hz."

I am not sure if it is a good idea to make a description like this. How
about an 'IPCableCom (planet mars)' if there would be such a thing? I
would suggest to add in the description of some common known usages, but
not defining it formal.

That is what is proposed above, but you already do make a 'REFERENCE'
for frequency ranges per country as defined in EN 300 001. I would
change the description saying that the default is defined on a per
country basis or something similar.

Harrie
(member of the MIB review team)
>     *From:* Eugene Nechamkin [mailto:[email-masked]]
>     *Sent:* Wednesday, October 20, 2004 11:50 AM
>     *To:* Beacham Gordon-CGB005; [email-masked]; Sumanth Channabasappa
>     *Subject:* RE: [ipcdn] pktcSigPowerRingFrequency description 
> change
> 
>      
clause
>     from the MIB Object definition, I am not completely comfortable
with
>     the fact that IETF MIB draft would make a reference to the
document
>     ([PKT-SP-MIB-SIG]) which will be obsolete when draft becomes an
RFC
>     (or soon thereafter). Besides, I am not sure to which extent the
>     mentioning of compliency with the [PKT-SP-MIB-SIG] or with the
>     [ITU-T-J169] is unambigous. Not sure presisely what this
>     "compliency" means. What's the intention here - to say that for
MTAs
>     compliant with NorthAmerican-PC the defval should be f20 but for
>     MTAs compliant with Euro-PC the defval should be f25Hz ? I think
the
>     reference to the compliency should be made less ambiguous.
>      
>     Eugene.
> 
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     *From:* [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] *On
>     Behalf Of *Beacham Gordon-CGB005
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, October 19, 2004 8:48 AM
>     *To:* [email-masked]; [email-masked]'
>     *Subject:* [ipcdn] pktcSigPowerRingFrequency description change
> 
>     compliant to [PKT-SP-MIB-SIG]. The default value for this object
>     MUST be f25Hz for MTAs compliant to [ITU-T-J169].
>      
>     Gordon
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> --
>