Subject: (IPng 7395) A few questions regarding draft-ietf-ipngwg-mld-mib-00.txt

From: "Peder Chr. Norgaard" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 1999 11:58:27 +0200 (MET DST)

I am glad to see the draft MIB for Multicast Listener Discovery
and have had a quick look at the possibility of implementing it.

Two quick questions come to mind:

1) To identify interfaces you have chosen to use an Integer32, with no
explicit reference to other MIBs.  Now, with IPv6 we have two different
and independent numberings of interfaces, namely the classical
IP-independent InterfaceIndex from IF-MIB (currently RFC 2233), and the
new IPv6 specific Ipv6IfIndex from IPV6-TC (currently RFC 2465).

Which of the two are you thinking of?  The document need to be clarified
on this point.

My preference would be the latter; that will allow the MIB to
describe MLD over anything that can be handled with the IPV6-MIB.  Using
the former could give problems for MLD over things like IPv4 tunnels
unless one have implemented a specific tunnel MIB with an associated
IF-MIB InterfaceIndex.

2) Why are you using the word and OID tree position "experimental"?  Is
this MIB not something that belongs on the normal Standards Track?

best regards

				--peder chr.

Peder Chr. Nørgaard                   System Developer, M. Sc.
Telebit Communications A/S            tel: +45 86 28 81 77 - 49
Fabrikvej 11                          fax: +45 86 28 81 86
DK-8260 Viby J   Denmark              e-mail: [email-masked]

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------