Subject: Re: [Adslmib] Re: VDSL Line Extension MIB - Modified

From: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 19:55:14 +0300

Bob and all,

Any LCS tables that were in the -07 draft certainly belong to the WG
charter/scope. The 2 newer drafts do not have those tables not because the
tables "do not belong to the charter" but because of considering the DSLF
TR. We now know how "mature" and serious is that DSLF management model. The
DSLF itself, after everyone (except for ECI and maybe others too) was happy
with the content of the TR, discovered a need for correcting the model
EVERY MEETING since they published TR. Part of the findings are going to be
included in a new working text (WT) but currently the DSLF model doesn't
match the -09 draft. It seems that tsome people in our WG don't see a need
to wait until the DSLF formally accept or reject those changes but (as Mike
just said) "The one thing no one wants is TWO standards". If that is
correct than we MUST hold our work until the DSLF members formally evaluate
the corrected model.

When Mike raised the possibility of having a "core" MIB and extension(s) to
that MIB I assumed that this is a procedure which is fully within the
charter. Now I see that even before discussing the missing SNMP objects
there is a potential scenario that we won't be able to even start such an
extension. I hear arguments such as "references to work that hasn't been
done is not productive", while the same WG published RFC2662 with a
reference to any external (proprietary) MIB. If the ADSL MIB can have a
hook for a proprietary extension, why can't the VDSL MIB include a hook for
a potential LCS extensions (proprietary or by IETF)?

Best regards,
Moti Morgenstern

Senior Systems Engineer
ECI Telecoms Ltd.
Inovia Broadband Access Division
30 Hasivim St.
Petach Tikva, Israel 49133
Tel.: +972-3-9266258
Fax: +972-3-9268182
Cell: +972-55-786258
e-mail: [email-masked]
www.ecitele.com

                      Bob Ray <rray@                                                                                                   
                      pesa.com>                To:      adslmib mail list <[email-masked]>                                           
                      Sent by:                 cc:                                                                                     
                      adslmib-admin@           Subject: [Adslmib] Re: VDSL Line Extension MIB - Modified                               
                      ietf.org                                                                                                         

                      09/06/03 17:15                                                                                                   
                      Please respond                                                                                                   
                      to rray                                                                                                          

Felix (and all):

This insistence that the hands of the IETF be bound by specific
references to work that hasn't been chartered and by work that
hasn't been done is not productive.

I would suggest, instead, that those who feel most strongly
about the "missing tables" do the following:

a) dredge up a copy of the -07 draft
b) write a draft vdsl-line-extension-mib using the missing
   tables
c) submit the draft as an individual contribution to the
   IETF
d) at the next meeting of the adslmib working group (perhaps
   Vienna), suggest that the charter be amended to support
   an extension MIB
e) humbly offer the individual contribution to the working
   group as a good starting point for such work.
f) work with (and in) the DSL Forum to achieve agreement as
   to THEIR preferred management objects.

I believe this approach would be FAR MORE PRODUCTIVE...

See: http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt for information
on accomplishing this.

Regards,
Bob Ray

_______________________________________________
Adslmib mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/adslmib

_______________________________________________
Adslmib mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/adslmib

---

From: Bob Ray <[email-masked]>
Date: 09 Jun 2003 12:49:46 -0500

> a potential LCS extensions (proprietary or by IETF)?

Moti:  

I assume you are referring to the following lines from RFC2662:

in section 5.2:

   It is intented that Line Code Specific MIBs be located under
   adslLCSMib.  These MIBs will be defined in separate modules.

and in section 7:

   -- Line Code Specific Tables

   -- These are place holders for the Line Code Specific MIBs
   -- once they become available.

   adslLCSMib  OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { adslMibObjects 16 }

It is my opinion that the above two are totally unnecessary.
What is obviously necessary is that someone needs to take a day
or two to create an individual submission ID and send it in.
I've already defined all the tables - it would be little more
than cut-and-paste (text from -07, objects from -07, text 
describing general approach from ADSL extension MIB).  It surely 
would take less time than this ceaseless bickering we're going 
through :)

I'm sorry that the DSLF is fractious.  I don't see that changing
any time soon, though.

Bob Ray