headers
Randy Presuhn | 5 Oct 2004 23:18
Picon

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-06.txt

Hi -

> From: <Internet-Drafts <at> ietf.org>
> To: <i-d-announce <at> ietf.org>
> Cc: <adslmib <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 12:28 PM
> Subject: [Adslmib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-06.txt
...

A few comments on the references in the udpated draft -

---

What is RFC 32766?  (page 16)

---

[RFC3410]  Case, J., Mindy, R., Partain, D. and B. Stewart,
              "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet
              Standard Management Framework", RFC 3416, December 2002.

The 3416 should be 3410.

---

BCP 78 and BCP 79 (3667 and 3668) are cited in the IPR stuff,
but do not appear in the references.  Does anyone know what the
current policy is for these?

---
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
Clay Sikes | 6 Oct 2004 14:51

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-06.txt

Randy,

Thanks for the comments. I'll spin out version -07 with the changes.

Thanks,
Clay

Randy Presuhn wrote:

>Hi -
>
>  
>
>>From: <Internet-Drafts <at> ietf.org>
>>To: <i-d-announce <at> ietf.org>
>>Cc: <adslmib <at> ietf.org>
>>Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 12:28 PM
>>Subject: [Adslmib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-06.txt
>>    
>>
>...
>
>A few comments on the references in the udpated draft -
>
>---
>
>What is RFC 32766?  (page 16)
>
>---
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Clay Sikes | 6 Oct 2004 21:57

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-06.txt

Randy,

I have made corrections to all the issues but one.  The one I haven't 
done is the third issue regarding references to BCP 78 / RFC 3667 and 
BCP 79 / RFC 3668.  I looked at the last six new RFCs and didn't see 
them in any of the references section. 

I'll upload version -07 tomorrow morning unless I hear otherwise.  My 
assumption is that the references are not needed.  Please let me know if 
my assumption is incorrect.

Thanks again for your comments and time.

- Clay

Randy Presuhn wrote:

>Hi -
>
>  
>
>>From: <Internet-Drafts <at> ietf.org>
>>To: <i-d-announce <at> ietf.org>
>>Cc: <adslmib <at> ietf.org>
>>Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 12:28 PM
>>Subject: [Adslmib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-06.txt
>>    
>>
>...
>
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Randy Presuhn | 6 Oct 2004 22:30
Picon

Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-06.txt

Hi -

> From: "Clay Sikes" <csikes <at> paradyne.com>
> To: "Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn <at> mindspring.com>
> Cc: <adslmib <at> ietf.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 12:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [Adslmib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-06.txt
...
> I have made corrections to all the issues but one.  The one I haven't
> done is the third issue regarding references to BCP 78 / RFC 3667 and
> BCP 79 / RFC 3668.  I looked at the last six new RFCs and didn't see
> them in any of the references section.

I *think* that's the correct thing to do, but don't recall what document explains
why BCP 78 & 79 get special treatment in references.  That's the reason
for my question.

> I'll upload version -07 tomorrow morning unless I hear otherwise.  My
> assumption is that the references are not needed.  Please let me know if
> my assumption is incorrect.
...

Sounds good to me.

Randy
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Clay Sikes | 14 Oct 2004 15:01

Re: gshdslbis-07 I-D Submission

Hi Mike,

Last Wednesday, 10/6/2004, I submitted version -07 to address Randy's 
comments on version -06. I got the IETF acknowledgment that -07 was 
received below. However, -07 has not yet been posted. Please advise if I 
need to do anything. I don't want to be over barring, yet I want to keep 
this moving forward.

Thanks,
Clay

Internet Draft Submission Manager wrote:

>Greetings:
>                                                                                
>This message is being sent to acknowledge receipt of your Internet-Draft
>submission or message to internet-drafts <at> ietf.org.
>If you submitted an Internet-Draft, then it will be posted
>on the Internet-Drafts page of the IETF Web site, and an I-D Action 
>message will be sent to the I-D-Announce List.  If you need to track the 
>status of your Internet-Draft submission at a later date, then please 
>send a note to ietf-action <at> ietf.org (using the suggested subject line 
>Status of I-D Submission: <filename>) and reference this auto-response 
>acknowledgement in the body.
>                                                                                
>Please note that all Internet-Drafts offered for publication
>as RFCs must conform to the requirements specified in I-D Checklist
>(<http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html>) or they will be returned
>to the author(s) for revision.  Therefore, the IETF Secretariat strongly 
>recommends that you address all of the issues raised in this document
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Wijnen, Bert (Bert | 15 Oct 2004 11:33
Picon
Favicon

RE: Re: gshdslbis-07 I-D Submission

> 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> Last Wednesday, 10/6/2004, I submitted version -07 to address Randy's 
> comments on version -06. I got the IETF acknowledgment that -07 was 
> received below. However, -07 has not yet been posted. Please advise if I 
> need to do anything. I don't want to be over barring, yet I want to keep 
> this moving forward.
> 
I propose that you send an email to internet-drafts <at> ietf.org (copy me pls)
to ask what the status is. A week seems pretty long for the doc to appear.
Maybe something dropped through the cracks.

Bert
> Thanks,
> Clay
> 
> 
> Internet Draft Submission Manager wrote:
> 
> >Greetings:
> >                                                             
>                    
> >This message is being sent to acknowledge receipt of your 
> Internet-Draft
> >submission or message to internet-drafts <at> ietf.org.
> >If you submitted an Internet-Draft, then it will be posted
> >on the Internet-Drafts page of the IETF Web site, and an I-D Action 
> >message will be sent to the I-D-Announce List.  If you need 
> to track the
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Internet-Drafts | 15 Oct 2004 21:34
Picon
Favicon

I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-07.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the ADSL MIB Working Group of the IETF.

	Title		: Definitions of Managed Objects for G.shdsl.bis Lines
	Author(s)	: C. Sikes, et al.
	Filename	: draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-07.txt
	Pages		: 73
	Date		: 2004-10-15
	
This document defines a Management Information Base (MIB) module for
   use with network management protocols in the Internet community.  In
   particular, it describes objects used for managing High Bit-Rate
   Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) - 2nd generation (HDSL2) and
   Single-Pair High-Speed Digital Subscriber Line (SHDSL) interfaces.
   This document introduces extensions to several objects and textual
   conventions defined in HDSL2-SHDSL-Line MIB (RFC 3276).  This
   document obsoletes RFC 3276.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-07.txt

To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to 
i-d-announce-request <at> ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.  
You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce 
to change your subscription settings.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-07.txt".
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Menachem Dodge | 17 Oct 2004 14:00
Picon

draft-ietf-adslmib-vdsl-ext-scm-06

Hello Bert,
 
    The draft-ietf-adslmib-vdsl-ext-scm-06 has been submitted in which all the issues that you raised have been addressed.
 
    My apologies for the delay, its just that I have had a very hectic month.
 
    As mentioned in my previous mail, the following has been done:
 
1. Changed the request for the OID;
 
            OLD: ::= { vdslMIB xx }
 
            NEW:  ::= { transmission xx }
 
 
    2. Changed enumerations to INTEGER rather than Unsigned32.
 
    3. Changed unsigned32 to Unsigned32.
 
    4. Added VdslSCMBandId as a Textual Convention, enumeration to index the two MIBS.
 
    5. Added VdslSCMBandUsage as a Textual Convention, enumeration to indicate if the band is in use.
 
    6. Successfully compiled the MIB without errors or warnings.
 
 
    In addition:
 
     7. Updated the   vdslLineSCMConfProfileBandRowStatus description explaining that rows can not be changed
while in the Active State.
 
 
     8. Added text to the vdslLineSCMConfProfileBandEntry for the persistency of the table.
 
      9. I have kept with BandId rather than BandType as this indicates the identity of the band.
 
    10. References to RFC3593, RFC3411 and RFC3418 have been removed.
 
     11. The Boiler plate text has been replaced.
 
 
    I have checked the document using the web nit tool.
 
    Kindest Regards,
 
    Menachem Dodge.

_______________________________________________
Adslmib mailing list
Adslmib <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/adslmib
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Wijnen, Bert (Bert | 17 Oct 2004 23:37
Picon
Favicon

RE: draft-ietf-adslmib-vdsl-ext-scm-06

THanks. I will try to re-review this week. Bert
-----Original Message-----
From: Menachem Dodge [mailto:mhdo <at> zahav.net.il]
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2004 08:00
To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
Cc: Michael Sneed; rray <at> pesa.com; Adslmib (E-mail)
Subject: draft-ietf-adslmib-vdsl-ext-scm-06

Hello Bert,
 
    The draft-ietf-adslmib-vdsl-ext-scm-06 has been submitted in which all the issues that you raised have been addressed.
 
    My apologies for the delay, its just that I have had a very hectic month.
 
    As mentioned in my previous mail, the following has been done:
 
1. Changed the request for the OID;
 
            OLD: ::= { vdslMIB xx }
 
            NEW:  ::= { transmission xx }
 
 
    2. Changed enumerations to INTEGER rather than Unsigned32.
 
    3. Changed unsigned32 to Unsigned32.
 
    4. Added VdslSCMBandId as a Textual Convention, enumeration to index the two MIBS.
 
    5. Added VdslSCMBandUsage as a Textual Convention, enumeration to indicate if the band is in use.
 
    6. Successfully compiled the MIB without errors or warnings.
 
 
    In addition:
 
     7. Updated the   vdslLineSCMConfProfileBandRowStatus description explaining that rows can not be changed
while in the Active State.
 
 
     8. Added text to the vdslLineSCMConfProfileBandEntry for the persistency of the table.
 
      9. I have kept with BandId rather than BandType as this indicates the identity of the band.
 
    10. References to RFC3593, RFC3411 and RFC3418 have been removed.
 
     11. The Boiler plate text has been replaced.
 
 
    I have checked the document using the web nit tool.
 
    Kindest Regards,
 
    Menachem Dodge.

_______________________________________________
Adslmib mailing list
Adslmib <at> ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/adslmib
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Clay Sikes | 18 Oct 2004 15:02

draft-ietf-adslmib-gshdslbis-07

All,

Version -07 has been placed on the ADSL MIB Group's Web page. The 
changes work the issues identified by Randy Presuhn on October 5, 2004. 
The changes include:

   1. Correct  bad reference on page 16 of version -06.
      Item 3 in the REVISION section had a reference to "RFC 32766" when
      it should have been "RFC 3276."
   2. The the reference  [RFC3410] had "RFC 3416" in it when it should
      have been "RFC 3410."
   3. Verified that the IPR stuff follows current policy and did not
      require any change.
   4. [RFC3267] was moved to the Normative section.
   5. [RFC3593] was moved to the Normative section.

Please let me know if there are any other issues.

Thanks,
Clay Sikes

-- Paradyne Mail --
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |

Gmane