Subject: WG lat call on LSR and LDP MIB moduels

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 22:46:30 +0200

All,

this is to initiate a two week wg last call on

         Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switching
         Router (LSR) Management Information Base
	<draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-mib-10.txt>

and
         Definitions of Managed Objects for the Multiprotocol Label
         Switching, Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)
         <draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mib-10.txt>

this wg last call ends June 22nd, and is limited to the changes in the
IDs since the previous wg last call, as well as interdepencies between
the two mib modules and the mib modules listed below.

For the LSR MIB please re-read the mail I sent to the list June 6 called
"prequeal to WG lat call om the LSR mib module"
(OK - my spelling, but admit that it is charming :) )

A usual silence will be understood as support, but this would not
necessarily stop you from giving positive comments. Please do.

There are more MIB modules coming up for wg last call and that have been
through wg last call, all of those will have interdependencies.

1. the TC mib module are wg last called and updated, but waiting for the
    others to be ready for IESG review
    <draft-ietf-mpls-tc-mib-07.txt>
2. the TE link MIB module is in wg last call (to end June 13)
    <draft-ietf-mpls-telink-mib-02.txt>
3. the management overview has been through wg lst call and has been
    uppdated
    <draft-ietf-mpls-mgmt-overview-05.txt>

Two other MIB modules are in the pipe and new version will be released
shortly

5. The TE mib module  <draft-ietf-mpls-te-mib-nn.txt>
6. The FTN mib module <draft-ietf-mpls-ftn-mib-nn.txt>

It is important that we complete this process of reviewing and updtating
before the ID cut off date (June 30) for the Vienna meeting.

-- 
/Loa

mobile + 46 739 81 21 64
email: [email-masked]

---

From: Loa Andersson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 08:12:00 +0200

All,

a missundertanding between me and the authors resulted in that the
wrong version of the LDP mib module was sent to this wg last call.

THe correct version is

<draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mib-11.txt>

this has just been sent for publication (and with a copy to the
mailing list).

My take is that we continue the wg last call as planned, but as
soon as I see the LDP mib being published I will extend the last
call period. This way will get both a head start and the required
period of time.

/Loa

-- 
/Loa

mobile + 46 739 81 21 64
email: [email-masked]

---

From: Marcus Brunner <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2003 15:43:20 +0200

> 	<draft-ietf-mpls-lsr-mib-10.txt>

I think it is just a nit. The question is why we need
mplsXCInSegmentIndex and mplsXCOutSegmentIndex
we can easily reuse mplsInSegmentIndex mplsOutSegmentIndex or do I miss 
something.

Marcus

--------------------------------------
Marcus Brunner
Network Laboratories
NEC Europe Ltd.

E-Mail: [email-masked]
WWW:    http://www.ccrle.nec.de/
Phone: +49 (0) 6221 905 11 29
Mobile: +49 (0) 163 275 17 43
personal home page: http://www.brubers.org/marcus

---

From: "Thomas D. Nadeau" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2003 08:34:54 -0400

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf 
> Of Marcus Brunner
> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2003 9:43 AM
> To: Loa Andersson; MPLS WG; Bert Wijnen; Alex Zinin
> Subject: Re: WG lat call on LSR and LDP MIB moduels
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mplsXCInSegmentIndex and mplsXCOutSegmentIndex we can easily 
> reuse mplsInSegmentIndex mplsOutSegmentIndex or do I miss 
> something.

	As I recall, there was some issue with the compiler
that required us to do this, but I cannot remember the
specific isue. Perhaps Bert remembers?

	--Tom