Subject: RE: [Entmib] London Minutes

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 21:42:21 +0200

> Actually, Andy presented a set of your slides regarding the Cisco
> Sensor Entity MIB.  Several people indicated that a Sensor MIB
> might be a useful thing, although much of the discussion centered
> on its applicability in industrial control applications.  Ultimately,
> though, there were very few people who thought that we should pursue
> this work in the Entity MIB WG, and even fewer people who indicated
> that they would be willing to contribute. 
> 
> Perhaps there are more people on the list who are interested in
> pursuing this work?  If so, I hope that they will speak up.  At a
> minimum, we would need someone (or a small group) who is interested 
> in writing a Sensor MIB document, and several people who are willing 
> to spend time discussing and reviewing a document.
> 

Please excuse me for not replying to this mail earlier. The first reason
is that in London the Entity MIB meeting conflicted with another WG
meeting that I needed to attend. If I were in that meeting I would have
added my hand to support this work. The other reason is that the latest
two messages of this thread are dated 9/11 or around, and it is only now
that I got to look through the e-mail backlog accumulated in that
terrible week.

I am supporting the work for a Sensor Entity MIB. Should the Entity MIB
WG decide to go ahead with this, I would be interested to be a co-editor
- or whatever is needed.

Regards,

Dan

_______________________________________________
Entmib mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/entmib

---

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 06:07:23 +0200

> 
> I am interested in co-authoring this MIB with Dan.  I think we should
> agree on the scope first, of course.  I think the MIB I presented
> in London would be a good starting point. The scope of that MIB
> is really network device sensors.  I don't object to creating a
> generic sensor MIB. Randy Presuhn mentioned (in London) configurable
> pressure sensors for factory pipe flow monitoring applications.
> Unless any WG members out there building such an SNMP application
> object, I would like to bias the scope of the work towards 
> network devices,
> things related to networking, etc.  

I agree. This would be in the good tradition of the Entity MIB - much
content in few objects.

> I was there for the 
> Chassis MIB fiasco,
> when then WG was told to write a MIB that would manage equally well,
> network cards in a chassis or "all the cities in Texas".

I was there too :-)

Regards,

Dan