Eduardo Cardona | 4 Nov 2003 16:58
Favicon

RFI v2 MIB Draft 08

Hi dear IPCD folks and OSSI reflector

 

Few updates of the last posted Draft -08

 

I am planning to do a quick update to the MIB draft after the IETF meeting to correct the below minor issues, Just a quick note, I will wait until the resolutions of the IETF IPCDN meeting to take actions on that.

 

 

Jason Tessier, identified a description in the idAdminStatus in the draft that is not needed and does not reflect the needs for interface Stack based on 

RFC 2863 to propagate ifAdminStatus top to bottom of the stack for and up/down transition. Only ifOperStatus is propagated because of ifAdminStatus changes or inherent interface changes.

 

Also for docsIfUpChannelUpdate related to the clone mechanism, all the related objects were updated to not being SCMA specific. One objects left out of the updates docsIfUpChannelUpdate. The proposed change will align that object description.

 

See at the end of the email the Jasson arguments for the ifAdminStatus change

 

Below are the proposed changes, let us know any changes.

 

Thanks

 

Eduardo

 

 

 

update to RFI Mib v2 with two changes:
 
1-  ifAdminStatus requirements for UpChannels should read.
     3.2.5.2.  ifEntry for Upstream interfaces 
  ifAdminStatus     The administrative status of this interface.
 
 
2- Re-define the requirement for  docsIfUpChannelUpdate  as below
 
- All the associated objects for the Clone Mechanism are no longer
referencing exclusively to SCDMA. The intention now is normalize this
requirements for all type of profiles.
 
- change GEN-ERROR for genError and COMMIT_FAILED_ERROR for
commitFailed
 
 
docsIfUpChannelUpdate OBJECT-TYPE
        SYNTAX      TruthValue
        MAX-ACCESS  read-create
        STATUS      current
        DESCRIPTION
            "Used to perform the transfer of adjusted SCDMA parameters
             from the temporary upstream row to the active upstream row
             indicated by the docsIfUpChannelCloneFrom object. The
             transfer is initiated through an SNMP SET of TRUE to this
             object. The SNMP SET will fail with a GEN_ERROR (snmpv1)
             or COMMIT_FAILED_ERROR (snmpv2c/v3) if the adjusted
             SCDMA parameter values are not compatible with each other.
             Although this object was created to facilitate SCDMA
             parameter adjustment, it may also be used at the vendor's
             discretion for non-SCDMA parameter adjustment.
             An SNMP GET of this object always returns FALSE."
        ::= { docsIfUpstreamChannelEntry 17 }
to:
 
docsIfUpChannelUpdate OBJECT-TYPE
        SYNTAX      TruthValue
        MAX-ACCESS  read-create
        STATUS      current
        DESCRIPTION
            "Used to perform the transfer of adjusted parameters
             from the temporary upstream row to the physical upstream row
             indicated by the docsIfUpChannelCloneFrom object. The
             transfer is initiated through an SNMP SET to 'true' of this
             object. The SNMP SET failure returns an error genError (snmpv1)
             or commitFailed (snmpv2c/v3) if the adjusted parameter values are
             not compatible with each other. 
             Reading this object always return 'false'."
        ::= { docsIfUpstreamChannelEntry 17 }
 
 
--------------------------------
 
IfAdminStatus Jasson email
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Jason.Tessier <at> arrisi.com [mailto:Jason.Tessier <at> arrisi.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2003 10:20 AM
To: DOCSIS OSS Majordomo List
Subject: ifAdminStatus sets to docsCableUpstream (129)


Hello,

In the DOCS-IF-MIB there's a requirement that ifAdminStatus sets to a docsCableUpstream interface also be applied to the docsCableUpstreamChannel interfaces under it.

3.2.5.2.1.  ifEntry for Upstream interfaces in Cable Modem Termination
                Systems
     
       ifTable           Comments
       ==============    ===========================================

<SNIP>
     
       ifType            The IANA value of docsCableUpstream (129).
     
<SNIP>    
       ifAdminStatus     The administrative status of this interface.
                         This reflect the total status of all the channels  
                         under this interface. So if at least one channel
                         has a physical connection this interface has
                         connection. Any SNMP SET on this interface will
                         cause a SET to all the channels under this
                         interface.

So in the case where there are multiple logical channels under one upstream interface, if you want to enable/disable the docsCableUpstream interface all of the logical channels associated with it are also set to up/down.

I think that this makes it difficult for the operator to set the ifAdminStatus of the docsCableUpstream interface without affecting several logical channels, some of which may not even have been enabled in the first place.  If an operator sets the ifAdminStatus of the docsCableUpstream to down, the set will already be reflected in the ifOperStatus of the docsCableUpstreamChannels under it. The OperStatus of the docsCableUpstreamChannels will reflect their own state, taking into account the upper layer and modulation profiles, etc. I don't see a need for this requirement.

An example:

interface                        ifAdminStatus
docsCableUpstream US 1          down
docsCableUpstreamChannel 1         up        
docsCableUpstreamChannel 2        down (not in use)
docsCableUpstreamChannel 2        down (not in use)
docsCableUpstreamChannel 2        down (not in use)

Setting ifAdminStatus of US 1 to up results in this:

interface                        ifAdminStatus
docsCableUpstream US 1          up
docsCableUpstreamChannel 1         up        
docsCableUpstreamChannel 2        up
docsCableUpstreamChannel 3        up
docsCableUpstreamChannel 4        up

The effect is that with one set 4 ifAdminStatus are affected, and 3 channels are put into use that may not be desired. I'm thinking of proposing an ECR to remove this requirement from the MIB.

Thanks,


Jason Tessier
QA Engineer
ARRIS Communications Ireland Ltd.
Jason.Tessier <at> arrisi.com
+353-21-7305826

Jean-Francois Mule | 7 Nov 2003 18:40
Favicon

Agenda for the IETF#58 IPCDN Nov 11'03 meeting in Minneapolis

Rich & I discussed the agenda items, sorry for the late notice, comments
welcome.
Here's the proposed agenda for the IPCDN WG meeting in Minneapolis. 

 
 IP over Cable Data Network WG (ipcdn)

 TUESDAY, November 11, 2003, from 1300 to 1400
 =============================================

 CHAIRS: Richard Woundy <Richard_Woundy <at> cable.comcast.com>
         Jean-Francois Mule <jf.mule <at> cablelabs.com>

 AGENDA:

 I.   Agenda Bashing

 II.  Administration
       Discuss new WG milestones
       Call for new editor for Event Notification MIB
        draft-ietf-ipcdn-docsisevent-mib-03.txt has expired
        and calls for action by WG chair have not helped.

 III. DOCSIS Submissions
      We'll discuss recent updates, open issues and next 
      steps for the following drafts:

    o  RF MIB v2 draft 08
       draft did not make the cut-off deadline
       review of comments addressed in upcoming 08

    o  DOCSIS BPI+ MIB draft 12
       draft-ietf-ipcdn-bpiplus-mib-12.txt

    o  Subscriber Mgmt MIB draft 13
       draft-ietf-ipcdn-subscriber-mib-13.txt

    o DOCSIS Cable Device MIB version 2
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt

    o DOCSIS QoS MIB
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-qos-mib-09.txt

 IV. IPCablecom/PacketCable Submissions
      We'll discuss recent updates, open issues and next 
      steps for the following drafts:
    o MTA MIB
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-mtamib-02.txt

    o Signaling MIB
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-signaling-02.txt 

    o Management Event MIB for PacketCable/IPCablecom 
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-eventmess-03.txt
      rev 3 was submitted but not posted.

 V. CableHome Submissions
    o CableHome Remote Diagnostic Tools MIB
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-cable-gateway-tools-mib-00.
      Discuss progress on Ping capability & Randy's comments

 VI. Next steps

-- Richard Woundy and Jean-Francois Mule, IPCDN co-chairs
Woundy, Richard | 7 Nov 2003 19:10
Picon

RE: Agenda for the IETF#58 IPCDN Nov 11'03 meeting in Minneapolis

Just a couple of updates:

>   o  RF MIB v2 draft 08
>      draft did not make the cut-off deadline
>      review of comments addressed in upcoming 08

JF is correct that the cut-off deadline was missed... but somehow the draft
was posted anyway at
<ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-docs-rfmibv2-08.txt>.

>   o Management Event MIB for PacketCable/IPCablecom 
>     draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-eventmess-03.txt
>     rev 3 was submitted but not posted.

Due to a submission error, rev 3 has been (mis-)posted as
<ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-eventmess-02.txt>.

So all documents that we want to discuss, with the obvious exception of the
expired DOCSIS Event Notification MIB, are available from the IETF and IPCDN
websites.

-- Rich

-----Original Message-----
From: Jean-Francois Mule [mailto:jf.mule <at> cablelabs.com]
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 12:41 PM
To: IPCDN (E-mail)
Cc: Woundy, Richard
Subject: Agenda for the IETF#58 IPCDN Nov 11'03 meeting in Minneapolis

Rich & I discussed the agenda items, sorry for the late notice, comments
welcome.
Here's the proposed agenda for the IPCDN WG meeting in Minneapolis. 

 
 IP over Cable Data Network WG (ipcdn)

 TUESDAY, November 11, 2003, from 1300 to 1400
 =============================================

 CHAIRS: Richard Woundy <Richard_Woundy <at> cable.comcast.com>
         Jean-Francois Mule <jf.mule <at> cablelabs.com>

 AGENDA:

 I.   Agenda Bashing

 II.  Administration
       Discuss new WG milestones
       Call for new editor for Event Notification MIB
        draft-ietf-ipcdn-docsisevent-mib-03.txt has expired
        and calls for action by WG chair have not helped.

 III. DOCSIS Submissions
      We'll discuss recent updates, open issues and next 
      steps for the following drafts:

    o  RF MIB v2 draft 08
       draft did not make the cut-off deadline
       review of comments addressed in upcoming 08

    o  DOCSIS BPI+ MIB draft 12
       draft-ietf-ipcdn-bpiplus-mib-12.txt

    o  Subscriber Mgmt MIB draft 13
       draft-ietf-ipcdn-subscriber-mib-13.txt

    o DOCSIS Cable Device MIB version 2
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt

    o DOCSIS QoS MIB
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-qos-mib-09.txt

 IV. IPCablecom/PacketCable Submissions
      We'll discuss recent updates, open issues and next 
      steps for the following drafts:
    o MTA MIB
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-mtamib-02.txt

    o Signaling MIB
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-signaling-02.txt 

    o Management Event MIB for PacketCable/IPCablecom 
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-eventmess-03.txt
      rev 3 was submitted but not posted.

 V. CableHome Submissions
    o CableHome Remote Diagnostic Tools MIB
      draft-ietf-ipcdn-cable-gateway-tools-mib-00.
      Discuss progress on Ping capability & Randy's comments

 VI. Next steps

-- Richard Woundy and Jean-Francois Mule, IPCDN co-chairs
Woundy, Richard | 10 Nov 2003 20:57
Picon

RE: Size of docsDevSwFilename in draft-ietf-ipcdn-device- mibv2-06.txt

I believe Azlina is correct. What should we do to resolve?

-- Rich

-----Original Message-----
From: Azlina Ahmad [mailto:azlina <at> cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 1:01 PM
To: Jean-Francois Mule
Cc: Woundy, Richard; ipcdn <at> ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ipcdn] Size of docsDevSwFilename in
draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt

Jean-Francois,
     I believe we have extended the upper bound of a mib object
in the past :)
However, per RFC2578 Section 9 rule (3) defined that "the size in octets 
of the value may be refined by raising the lower-bounds, by reducing the 
upper-bounds, and/or by reducing the alternative size choices."
So, extending this size may not be permitted.

Thanks,
Azlina

Jean-Francois Mule wrote:
> Rich,
> 
> Reviewing the cable device v2 mib to create the compliance statement for
PacketCable Standalone MTAs, we noticed that the object size is limited to
64 chars. While this may be plenty for tftp filenames, it could be a bit
restrictive in the case of HTTP download.
> 
> Therefore, we'd like to recommend the following:
>  - the docsDevSwFilename object definition be extended to a size of 128 at
a minimum
>  - the compliance statement for v2 DOCSIS CM restrict the implementation
to 64 for those devices so that there is no requirement change for DOCSIS
> 
> docsDevSwFilename OBJECT-TYPE
>         SYNTAX      SnmpAdminString (SIZE (0..64))
>         MAX-ACCESS  read-write
>         STATUS      current
>         DESCRIPTION
>             "The filename of the software image to be downloaded via
>              TFTP, or the abs_path (as defined in RFC2616) of the
>              software image to be downloaded via HTTP.
> 
>              Unless set via SNMP, this is the filename or abs_path
>              specified by the provisioning server during the boot
>              process, that corresponds to the software version that
>              is desired for this device.
> 
>              If unknown, the value of this object is the empty string."
>         ::= { docsDevSoftware 2 }
> 
> Comments appreciated.
> Jean-François 
> 
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Internet-Drafts <at> ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts <at> ietf.org] 
>>Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 3:10 PM
>>Cc: ipcdn <at> ietf.org
>>Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt
>>
>>
>>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line 
>>Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the 
>>IP over Cable Data Network Working Group of the IETF.
>>
>>	Title		: Cable Device Management Information 
>>Base for DOCSIS compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem 
>>Termination Systems
>>	Author(s)	: R. Woundy
>>	Filename	: draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt
>>	Pages		: 79
>>	Date		: 2003-10-27
>>	
>>This memo is a draft revision of the standards track 
>>RFC-2669. Please see 'Revision Descriptions' below for a 
>>description of changes.  This document will obsolete RFC-2669 
>>when accepted. This memo defines a portion of the Management 
>>Information Base (MIB) for use with network management 
>>protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it 
>>defines a basic set of managed objects for SNMP- based 
>>management of DOCSIS compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem 
>>Termination Systems. This memo is a product of the IPCDN 
>>working group within the Internet Engineering Task Force.  
>>Comments are solicited and should be addressed to the working 
>>group's mailing list at ipcdn <at> ietf.org and/or the author.
>>
>>A URL for this Internet-Draft is: 
>>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mi
> 
> bv2-06.txt
> 
> To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to 
> ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the
message.
> 
> 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-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt".
> 
> A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
> 
> 
> Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.
> 
> Send a message to:
> 	mailserv <at> ietf.org.
> In the body type:
> 	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt".
> 	
> NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
> 	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
> 	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
> 	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
> 	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
> 	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
> 	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
> 	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
> 	how to manipulate these messages.
> 		
> 		
> Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IPCDN mailing list
> IPCDN <at> ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn
> 
Wijnen, Bert (Bert | 10 Nov 2003 21:26
Picon
Favicon

RE: Size of docsDevSwFilename in draft-ietf-ipcdn-device- mibv2-06.txt

One could wonder if the 64 size limit in RFC2669 could be 
considered a (fatal) bug in that spec?

If so, then fixing that seems plausable/acceptable, and 
with a proper module COMPLIANCE  as discussed below, that
would probably be OK. Of course the WG needs to agree with
that.

my 2 cents

Thanks,
Bert 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Woundy, Richard [mailto:Richard_Woundy <at> cable.comcast.com]
> Sent: maandag 10 november 2003 20:58
> To: 'azlina <at> cisco.com'; Jean-Francois Mule
> Cc: ipcdn <at> ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [ipcdn] Size of docsDevSwFilename in
> draft-ietf-ipcdn-device- mibv2-06.txt
> 
> 
> I believe Azlina is correct. What should we do to resolve?
> 
> -- Rich
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Azlina Ahmad [mailto:azlina <at> cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 1:01 PM
> To: Jean-Francois Mule
> Cc: Woundy, Richard; ipcdn <at> ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [ipcdn] Size of docsDevSwFilename in
> draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt
> 
> 
> Jean-Francois,
>      I believe we have extended the upper bound of a mib object
> in the past :)
> However, per RFC2578 Section 9 rule (3) defined that "the 
> size in octets 
> of the value may be refined by raising the lower-bounds, by 
> reducing the 
> upper-bounds, and/or by reducing the alternative size choices."
> So, extending this size may not be permitted.
> 
> Thanks,
> Azlina
> 
> Jean-Francois Mule wrote:
> > Rich,
> > 
> > Reviewing the cable device v2 mib to create the compliance 
> statement for
> PacketCable Standalone MTAs, we noticed that the object size 
> is limited to
> 64 chars. While this may be plenty for tftp filenames, it 
> could be a bit
> restrictive in the case of HTTP download.
> > 
> > Therefore, we'd like to recommend the following:
> >  - the docsDevSwFilename object definition be extended to a 
> size of 128 at
> a minimum
> >  - the compliance statement for v2 DOCSIS CM restrict the 
> implementation
> to 64 for those devices so that there is no requirement 
> change for DOCSIS
> > 
> > docsDevSwFilename OBJECT-TYPE
> >         SYNTAX      SnmpAdminString (SIZE (0..64))
> >         MAX-ACCESS  read-write
> >         STATUS      current
> >         DESCRIPTION
> >             "The filename of the software image to be downloaded via
> >              TFTP, or the abs_path (as defined in RFC2616) of the
> >              software image to be downloaded via HTTP.
> > 
> >              Unless set via SNMP, this is the filename or abs_path
> >              specified by the provisioning server during the boot
> >              process, that corresponds to the software version that
> >              is desired for this device.
> > 
> >              If unknown, the value of this object is the 
> empty string."
> >         ::= { docsDevSoftware 2 }
> > 
> > Comments appreciated.
> > Jean-François 
> > 
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Internet-Drafts <at> ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts <at> ietf.org] 
> >>Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 3:10 PM
> >>Cc: ipcdn <at> ietf.org
> >>Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt
> >>
> >>
> >>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line 
> >>Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the 
> >>IP over Cable Data Network Working Group of the IETF.
> >>
> >>	Title		: Cable Device Management Information 
> >>Base for DOCSIS compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem 
> >>Termination Systems
> >>	Author(s)	: R. Woundy
> >>	Filename	: draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt
> >>	Pages		: 79
> >>	Date		: 2003-10-27
> >>	
> >>This memo is a draft revision of the standards track 
> >>RFC-2669. Please see 'Revision Descriptions' below for a 
> >>description of changes.  This document will obsolete RFC-2669 
> >>when accepted. This memo defines a portion of the Management 
> >>Information Base (MIB) for use with network management 
> >>protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it 
> >>defines a basic set of managed objects for SNMP- based 
> >>management of DOCSIS compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem 
> >>Termination Systems. This memo is a product of the IPCDN 
> >>working group within the Internet Engineering Task Force.  
> >>Comments are solicited and should be addressed to the working 
> >>group's mailing list at ipcdn <at> ietf.org and/or the author.
> >>
> >>A URL for this Internet-Draft is: 
> >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mi
> > 
> > bv2-06.txt
> > 
> > To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a 
> message to 
> > ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the
> message.
> > 
> > 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-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt".
> > 
> > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
> http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
> > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
> > 
> > 
> > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.
> > 
> > Send a message to:
> > 	mailserv <at> ietf.org.
> > In the body type:
> > 	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt".
> > 	
> > NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
> > 	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
> > 	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
> > 	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
> > 	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant 
> mail readers
> > 	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
> > 	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
> > 	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
> > 	how to manipulate these messages.
> > 		
> > 		
> > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
> implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
> Internet-Draft.
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > IPCDN mailing list
> > IPCDN <at> ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IPCDN mailing list
> IPCDN <at> ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn
> 
Jean-Francois Mule | 10 Nov 2003 21:33
Favicon

RE: Size of docsDevSwFilename in draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt

(I thought I had sent this but it was stuck in my draft folder, and just saw Rich's note - sorry).

Azlina,
Good point, I forgot that the device mib is *not* a "new" mib and we can't increase the upper bound.
We have a couple of options:
 - do nothing (operators should get their http server hostnames and URL down to 64 chars)
 - keep docsDevSwFilename for TFTP and add a new object docsDevSwFilenameURL for http
   (this has the advantage to leave the DOCSIS implementations intact on this object)
 - deprecate docsDevSwFilename and a new object docsDevSwFilenameURL for tftp and http

Since this new object is moslty required for PAcketCable Standalone MTAs, I'm ok with option 2 above.

Jean-François 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Azlina Ahmad [mailto:azlina <at> cisco.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 31, 2003 11:01 AM
> To: Jean-Francois Mule
> Cc: Woundy, Richard; ipcdn <at> ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [ipcdn] Size of docsDevSwFilename in 
> draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt
> 
> 
> Jean-Francois,
>      I believe we have extended the upper bound of a mib
> object in the past :) However, per RFC2578 Section 9 rule (3) 
> defined that "the size in octets 
> of the value may be refined by raising the lower-bounds, by 
> reducing the 
> upper-bounds, and/or by reducing the alternative size 
> choices." So, extending this size may not be permitted.
> 
> Thanks,
> Azlina
> 
> Jean-Francois Mule wrote:
> > Rich,
> > 
> > Reviewing the cable device v2 mib to create the compliance
> statement
> > for PacketCable Standalone MTAs, we noticed that the object size is
> > limited to 64 chars. While this may be plenty for tftp 
> filenames, it
> > could be a bit restrictive in the case of HTTP download.
> > 
> > Therefore, we'd like to recommend the following:
> >  - the docsDevSwFilename object definition be extended to a size of
> > 128 at a minimum
> >  - the compliance statement for v2 DOCSIS CM restrict the 
> implementation to 64 for those devices so that there is no
> requirement change for DOCSIS
> > 
> > docsDevSwFilename OBJECT-TYPE
> >         SYNTAX      SnmpAdminString (SIZE (0..64))
> >         MAX-ACCESS  read-write
> >         STATUS      current
> >         DESCRIPTION
> >             "The filename of the software image to be downloaded via
> >              TFTP, or the abs_path (as defined in RFC2616) of the
> >              software image to be downloaded via HTTP.
> > 
> >              Unless set via SNMP, this is the filename or abs_path
> >              specified by the provisioning server during the boot
> >              process, that corresponds to the software version that
> >              is desired for this device.
> > 
> >              If unknown, the value of this object is the
> empty string."
> >         ::= { docsDevSoftware 2 }
> > 
> > Comments appreciated.
> > Jean-François
> > 
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Internet-Drafts <at> ietf.org [mailto:Internet-Drafts <at> ietf.org]
> >>Sent: Monday, October 27, 2003 3:10 PM
> >>Cc: ipcdn <at> ietf.org
> >>Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt
> >>
> >>
> >>A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
> >>directories. This draft is a work item of the IP over Cable Data 
> >>Network Working Group of the IETF.
> >>
> >>	Title		: Cable Device Management Information 
> >>Base for DOCSIS compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem Termination 
> >>Systems
> >>	Author(s)	: R. Woundy
> >>	Filename	: draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt
> >>	Pages		: 79
> >>	Date		: 2003-10-27
> >>	
> >>This memo is a draft revision of the standards track RFC-2669. 
> >>Please see 'Revision Descriptions' below for a description of 
> >>changes.  This document will obsolete RFC-2669 when accepted. This 
> >>memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for 
> >>use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In 
> >>particular, it defines a basic set of managed objects for SNMP- 
> >>based management of DOCSIS compliant Cable Modems and Cable Modem
> >>Termination Systems. This memo is a product of the IPCDN 
> >>working group within the Internet Engineering Task Force.  
> >>Comments are solicited and should be addressed to the working 
> >>group's mailing list at ipcdn <at> ietf.org and/or the author.
> >>
> >>A URL for this Internet-Draft is: 
> >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mi
> > 
> > bv2-06.txt
> > 
> > To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a
> message to
> > ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body
> of the message.
> > 
> > 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-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt".
> > 
> > A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
> > http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
> > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt
> > 
> > 
> > Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.
> > 
> > Send a message to:
> > 	mailserv <at> ietf.org.
> > In the body type:
> > 	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-06.txt".
> > 	
> > NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
> > 	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
> > 	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
> > 	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
> > 	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant
> mail readers
> > 	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
> > 	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
> > 	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
> > 	how to manipulate these messages.
> > 		
> > 		
> > Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
> > implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the 
> > Internet-Draft.
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > IPCDN mailing list
> > IPCDN <at> ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn
> > 
> 
> 
> 
Woundy, Richard | 11 Nov 2003 18:43
Picon

Slides for today's WG meeting

Folks,

Today's slides are posted at
<http://www.ipcdn.org/meetings/ipcdn-agenda-111103.ppt>. The meeting will
start at 1PM central time.

We will attempt to get a jabber scribe onsite, so that remote folks can
participate.

-- Rich
Eduardo Cardona | 11 Nov 2003 19:36
Favicon

RE: Q of docsIfCmtsChannelUtUtilization for Upstream


Hi Minnie, 

It is debatable if the current text imposes the fixed bandwidth
allocation. 
We believe the text should be taken in the context of the measurement
interval. From that perspective we think It won't preclude or limit the
CMTS capabilities to change dynamically the % bandwidth allocation. 

Internally at CL, Greg and I looked at the case and probably the
proposed text below may help. 
-> added at the end of the below paragraph: "over the most recent
utilization interval."

               For an upstream interface that has multiple logical
               upstream channels enabled, the utilization index is a
               weighted sum of utilization indices for the logical
               channels. The weight for each utilization index is the
               percentage of upstream minislots allocated for the
               corresponding logical channel over the most recent
               utilization interval.

Eduardo, Greg

 
-----Original Message-----
From: Minnie Lu [mailto:milu <at> cisco.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 6:25 PM
To: Jean-Francois Mule; Eduardo Cardona; Greg White
Cc: milu <at> cisco.com; DOCSIS OSS Majordomo List
Subject: Q of docsIfCmtsChannelUtUtilization for Upstream

Hi, all,

   I have a question about upstream docsIfCmtsChannelUtUtilization.  In
the 
description, it says:

"Upstream Channel Utilization Index:
              The upstream channel utilization index is expressed as a
              percentage of minislots utilized on the physical channel,
              regardless of burst type. For an Initial Maintenance
              region, the minislots for the complete region are
              considered utilized if the CMTS received an upstream
              burst within the region from any CM on the physical
              channel.  For contention REQ and REQ/DATA regions, the
              minislots for a transmission opportunity within the
              region are considered utilized if the CMTS received an
              upstream burst within the opportunity from any CM on the
              physical channel. For all other regions, utilized
              minislots are those in which the CMTS granted
              bandwidth to any unicast SID on the physical channel.

              For an upstream interface that has multiple logical
              upstream channels enabled, the utilization index is a
              weighted sum of utilization indices for the logical
              channels. The weight for each utilization index is the
              percentage of upstream minislots allocated for the
              corresponding logical channel.
              Example:
              If 75% of bandwidth is allocated to the first logical
              channel and 25% to the second, and the utilization
              indices for each are 60 and 40 respectively, the
              utilization index for the upstream physical channel is
              (60 * 0.75) + (40 * 0.25) = 55. This figure
              applies to the most recent utilization interval."

Q: for multiple logical channels enabled case, why can it be still
  "a percentage of minislots utilized on the physical channel,
regardless 
of burst type." ?  That is, (the sum of minislots utilized for all
logical 
channels) /
                              (the sum of total  minislots for all
logical 
channels)

   In the current description, it seems that CMTS must support fixed %
of 
bandwidth allocated for each logical channel, I cannot find such 
requirement in RFIv2.0 spec.  Also according to the RFIv2.0 spec, some
CMTS 
vendor might choose to support that the % could be changed dynamically
at 
the run time for logical channels or some vendors might choose to
support 
dynamical bandwidth allocation without any fixed %.

   So may I suggest to remove the follow statements from the description
of 
docsIfCmtsChannelUtUtilization ?

             " For an upstream interface that has multiple logical
              upstream channels enabled, the utilization index is a
              weighted sum of utilization indices for the logical
              channels. The weight for each utilization index is the
              percentage of upstream minislots allocated for the
              corresponding logical channel.
              Example:
              If 75% of bandwidth is allocated to the first logical
              channel and 25% to the second, and the utilization
              indices for each are 60 and 40 respectively, the
              utilization index for the upstream physical channel is
              (60 * 0.75) + (40 * 0.25) = 55. This figure
              applies to the most recent utilization interval."

   If I miss any thing, please advice me !

   Thanks a lot for your help !
   Minnie

Eduardo Cardona | 11 Nov 2003 19:54
Favicon

RE: Q of docsIfCmtsChannelUtUtilization for Upstream


Hi Minnie Lu, 

The other concern you have is the US Interface Utilization calculation, 
I will assume that if a dynamic Burst profile adjustment is chosen by
the CMTS, the Utilization interval must be adjusted to be lower that the
dynamic Burst profile rate change ( actually half to be sort of Nyquist
compliant.) 

To support your case the description should be changed for the US
interface, and I see no real benefit for  overall historical data
analysis perspective.

The weighted perception of US Interface I believe is more realistic
(valuable? )and shows the bandwidth utilization sensitivity better (See
examples below)

At the end, the users consume Bandwidth with a bad or good minislots
usage/efficiencies of them, based on the Modulation profile used and CM
allocation among channels.

Also since burst types could be variable (Dynamic) the only average
constant would be user bandwidth usage at least for planning purposes
and historical recollection, weighted usage is a normalization of the
differences among channels.

Supposed Channels A, B and lets use a coins (minislots) vs coins value
(burst type) 
A has 3 5 cents coins 
B has 6 10 cents coins

Minislots usage =  coins spend 
Weighted Minislots usage  -> cents usage

In Us Channels  (A or B) spend coins vs spend cents ( minislots vs BW)
is the same.

With the US DS counters you can get also the U based on sharp 

Total BW ( in cents is 3*5 + 6*10)  = 75
Total coins = 3 + 6   = 9

If A spends 2 coins and B spends 1 coin 

Spend coins = 2 + 1 = 3 U% 3/9 = 33%
Spend Cents: 2*5 + 1*10 = 20 U% = 20/75 = 26%

ChaA U = 2/3 = 66%
ChaB U = 1/6 = 16%

Supposed the other case of B more used

A Spends 1 coin and B spend 4 coins
US channel
Coins spend 1 + 4 = 5; U = 5/9 = 55%
Cents spend 1*5 + 5*10 = 55; U% = 75%

ChaA U = 1/3 =  33%
ChaB U = 5/6 =  83%

-----Original Message-----
From: Eduardo Cardona 
Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 11:37 AM
To: 'Minnie Lu'; 'ipcdn <at> ietf.org'
Cc: DOCSIS OSS Majordomo List; Jean-Francois Mule; Greg White
Subject: RE: Q of docsIfCmtsChannelUtUtilization for Upstream

Hi Minnie, 

It is debatable if the current text imposes the fixed bandwidth
allocation. 
We believe the text should be taken in the context of the measurement
interval. From that perspective we think It won't preclude or limit the
CMTS capabilities to change dynamically the % bandwidth allocation. 

Internally at CL, Greg and I looked at the case and probably the
proposed text below may help. 
-> added at the end of the below paragraph: "over the most recent 
-> utilization interval."

               For an upstream interface that has multiple logical
               upstream channels enabled, the utilization index is a
               weighted sum of utilization indices for the logical
               channels. The weight for each utilization index is the
               percentage of upstream minislots allocated for the
               corresponding logical channel over the most recent
               utilization interval.

Eduardo, Greg

 
-----Original Message-----
From: Minnie Lu [mailto:milu <at> cisco.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 10, 2003 6:25 PM
To: Jean-Francois Mule; Eduardo Cardona; Greg White
Cc: milu <at> cisco.com; DOCSIS OSS Majordomo List
Subject: Q of docsIfCmtsChannelUtUtilization for Upstream

Hi, all,

   I have a question about upstream docsIfCmtsChannelUtUtilization.  In
the 
description, it says:

"Upstream Channel Utilization Index:
              The upstream channel utilization index is expressed as a
              percentage of minislots utilized on the physical channel,
              regardless of burst type. For an Initial Maintenance
              region, the minislots for the complete region are
              considered utilized if the CMTS received an upstream
              burst within the region from any CM on the physical
              channel.  For contention REQ and REQ/DATA regions, the
              minislots for a transmission opportunity within the
              region are considered utilized if the CMTS received an
              upstream burst within the opportunity from any CM on the
              physical channel. For all other regions, utilized
              minislots are those in which the CMTS granted
              bandwidth to any unicast SID on the physical channel.

              For an upstream interface that has multiple logical
              upstream channels enabled, the utilization index is a
              weighted sum of utilization indices for the logical
              channels. The weight for each utilization index is the
              percentage of upstream minislots allocated for the
              corresponding logical channel.
              Example:
              If 75% of bandwidth is allocated to the first logical
              channel and 25% to the second, and the utilization
              indices for each are 60 and 40 respectively, the
              utilization index for the upstream physical channel is
              (60 * 0.75) + (40 * 0.25) = 55. This figure
              applies to the most recent utilization interval."

Q: for multiple logical channels enabled case, why can it be still
  "a percentage of minislots utilized on the physical channel,
regardless 
of burst type." ?  That is, (the sum of minislots utilized for all
logical 
channels) /
                              (the sum of total  minislots for all
logical 
channels)

   In the current description, it seems that CMTS must support fixed %
of 
bandwidth allocated for each logical channel, I cannot find such 
requirement in RFIv2.0 spec.  Also according to the RFIv2.0 spec, some
CMTS 
vendor might choose to support that the % could be changed dynamically
at 
the run time for logical channels or some vendors might choose to
support 
dynamical bandwidth allocation without any fixed %.

   So may I suggest to remove the follow statements from the description
of 
docsIfCmtsChannelUtUtilization ?

             " For an upstream interface that has multiple logical
              upstream channels enabled, the utilization index is a
              weighted sum of utilization indices for the logical
              channels. The weight for each utilization index is the
              percentage of upstream minislots allocated for the
              corresponding logical channel.
              Example:
              If 75% of bandwidth is allocated to the first logical
              channel and 25% to the second, and the utilization
              indices for each are 60 and 40 respectively, the
              utilization index for the upstream physical channel is
              (60 * 0.75) + (40 * 0.25) = 55. This figure
              applies to the most recent utilization interval."

   If I miss any thing, please advice me !

   Thanks a lot for your help !
   Minnie

Jean-Francois Mule | 21 Nov 2003 23:24
Favicon

ipcdn DOCSIS QoS mib and closure on IP TOS vs. DSCP open issue

Bert,

At the last IETF meeting, you asked that we provide a short write-up to
close the one open issue on the IPCDN DOCSIS QoS MIB draft09. Greg White
has put together the attached note integrating thoughts & comments from
the IPCDN QoS MIB co-authors - William Murwin & Patrick Michael, Matt
Schmitt, Rich and myself (thank you Greg).

I believe this write-up answers your request. 
It provides:
 - the list of MIB objects using TOS value in the QoS mib
   object name, the max-access (read-only), what the object is for and
whether it is used in the DOCSIS network only (between CM - CMTS) or
whether it would potentially get propagated in the backbone (to
understand whether this could break the PHB behavior in the backbone),
 - the range of TOS values these objects can have and how the mapping
with the six bits of DSCP can be achieved,
 - the justification to maintain TOS based on past & current DOCSIS
systems along with the limited applicability scope.

Let us know what the next steps are to advance the IPCDN QoS MIB. Upon
your review & recommendations, it is our intent to release an updated
draft10 which will be ready for publication.

Thanks,
Rich & Jean-Francois - ipcdn wg co-chairs
To: Bert Wijnen <bwijnen <at> lucent.com>, Area Director, IETF Operations and Management Area
From: IPCDN WG Chairs: Richard Woundy <Richard_Woundy <at> cable.comcast.com>, Jean-Francois Mule <jf.mule <at> cablelabs.com>
CC: ipcdn <at> ietf.org

RE: ipcdn DOCSIS QoS mib and closure on IP TOS vs. DSCP open issue

The DOCSIS QoS MIB (draft-ietf-ipcdn-qos-mib-09) contains five objects which use the (former) IPv4 TOS
octet as defined in RFC 791. All are read-only objects which are used to instrument settings that have been
configured via a DOCSIS-defined protocol mechanism (configuration file transfer and/or MAC-layer
management message exchange).

The five objects are used for two different functionalities within the DOCSIS access network. 

The first functionality is packet classification to provide Quality of Service on the DOCSIS access
network.  The DOCSIS protocol includes messaging to configure packet classification that can match
packets based on (among other things) the contents of the TOS octet of the IPv4 header.  This IP
Type-of-Service classifier configuration uses three parameters: tos-low, tos-high, and tos-mask. 
Packets match the classifier if their "ip-tos" byte meets the criteria: tos-low <= (ip-tos AND tos-mask)
<= tos-high.  With proper choices of the three parameters (in particular, tos-mask=0xFC,
tos-low=tos-high=DSCP<<2), this functionality could be used to enable a DiffServ-capable access
network.  Because this functionality is only used to provide QoS on the DOCSIS access network, and does not
modify the contents of the IPv4 datagram, this does not break any usage of DiffServ or ECN on the backbone.
The following three read-only objects reflect the configured settings for this functionality:
    docsQosPktClassIpTosLow           
    docsQosPktClassIpTosHigh          
    docsQosPktClassIpTosMask           


The second functionality is TOS Overwrite.  The DOCSIS protocol includes messaging to configure the
overwrite of the IPv4 TOS octet for certain packet flows in the upstream (from the customer) direction. 
This overwrite is done at the headend (CMTS) before the packets are forwarded to the operator's managed IP
metro/aggregation network.  The TOS overwrite functionality uses two parameters: tos-and-mask and
tos-or-mask.  The TOS octet in applicable packets is overwritten with the value (orig-ip-tos AND
tos-and-mask) OR tos-or-mask. With proper choice of these two parameters (in particular,
tos-and-mask=0x03, tos-or-mask=DSCP<<2), the operator can set the DSCP for particular packet flows in
order to provide PHBs in their metro/aggregation network, without affecting the ECN bits.  Because the
entire TOS octet can be overwritten, there is the potential however that an operator could configure
their network to overwrite the ECN bits on packets eventually destined for the backbone.  This clearly
should be avoided.  The following two read-only objects reflect the configured settings for this functionality:
    docsQosParamSetTosAndMask        
    docsQosParamSetTosOrMask          


Since these objects are read-only and reflect settings that are configured via a standardized (ITU-T Rec.
J.112-B, ITU-T Rec. J.122), widely implemented, and widely deployed protocol, changes to the
underlying protocol would be required in order to completely eliminate the possibility of overwriting
ECN.  We will ensure that future versions of the protocol do not propagate this behavior.  For the past and
current versions (for which this MIB was developed), we suggest that additional text be added to DOCSIS
QoS MIB RFC to indicate that the TOS Overwrite functionality should not be configured in such a way that it
leads to modification of the ECN field.

In particular, we suggest that the following changes be made to address these concerns:

##Change 1##

Current text:
=============
4.  DOCSIS and IPv4 Type-of-Service(ToS) Field

   The DOCSIS-IETF-QOS-MIB does reflect Differented Services Code Point
   (DSCP) [13], instead it use objects that reflect IPv4 Type-of-Service
   (ToS) fields. The DOCSIS specification does not support Differented
   Services at this time because DOCSIS relies on masking of the IP ToS
   bits. Masking is not allowed in Differented Services because of
   cocern the 2 bit that make up the "Explicit Congestion Notification
   (ECN)" field [14] could be overwritten if the mask consisted of 8
   bits.

Suggested text:
===============
4.  DOCSIS and IPv4 Type-of-Service(ToS) Field

   The DOCSIS-IETF-QOS-MIB MIB module relies on the DOCSIS MAC layer 
   protocols and uses objects that reflect the IPv4 Type-of-Service (ToS) 
   octet as defined in RFC791. The applicability of these objects is 
   limited to the DOCSIS access network. The past and current versions of 
   the DOCSIS specifications for which this MIB module is defined do not 
   reflect Differentiated Services [13] on the DOCSIS access network.  
   However, with proper selection of values for these objects, the 
   network operator can enforce Differentiated Services Per-hop Behaviors 
   (PHBs) on the DOCSIS Access Network, and can configure the 
   modification of the DSCP for certain packet flows as they enter the 
   metro network from the access network, essentially making the DOCSIS 
   access network TOS marking compatible with the wider use of DSCP 
   outside DOCSIS networks.  It should be noted that because the entire 
   IPv4 TOS octet is available for modification via the latter mechanism 
   (due to the current MAC level DOCSIS protocols), there is the 
   possibility that the DOCSIS network could be configured to modify the 
   Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) field [14] of certain packets.  
   This must clearly be avoided and an attempt has been made in this 
   document to outline this limitation of DOCSIS.



##Change 2##

Current Text:
=============
docsQosParamSetTosAndMask OBJECT-TYPE
    SYNTAX          OCTET STRING (SIZE(1))
    MAX-ACCESS      read-only
    STATUS          current
    DESCRIPTION    "Specifies the AND mask for IP TOS byte for
                    overwriting IP packets TOS value. The IP packets TOS
                    byte is bitwise ANDed with docsQosParamSetTosAndMask
                    and result is bitwise ORed with
                    docsQosParamSetTosORMask and result is written to IP
                    packet TOS byte.
                    A value of 'FF'H for docsQosParamSetTosAndMask and
                    a value of '00'H for docsQosParamSetTosOrMask means
                    that IP Packet TOS byte is not overwritten.

                    This combination is reported if the referenced
                    parameter is not present in a QOS Parameter Set.

                    Even though the this object is only enforced by the
                    Cable Modem Termination System (CMTS),
                    Cable Modems must report the value as signaled in
                    the referenced parameter."
    REFERENCE      "SP-RFIv1.1-I10-037030, Appendix C.2.2.6.10"
    ::= { docsQosParamSetEntry 21 }


Suggested Text:
=============
docsQosParamSetTosAndMask OBJECT-TYPE
    SYNTAX          OCTET STRING (SIZE(1))
    MAX-ACCESS      read-only
    STATUS          current
    DESCRIPTION    "Specifies the AND mask for IP TOS byte for
                    overwriting IP packets TOS value. The IP packets TOS
                    byte is bitwise ANDed with docsQosParamSetTosAndMask
                    and result is bitwise ORed with
                    docsQosParamSetTosORMask and result is written to IP
                    packet TOS byte.
                    A value of 'FF'H for docsQosParamSetTosAndMask and
                    a value of '00'H for docsQosParamSetTosOrMask means
                    that IP Packet TOS byte is not overwritten.

                    This combination is reported if the referenced
                    parameter is not present in a QOS Parameter Set.

                    The IP TOS octet as originally defined in RFC 791 has
                    been superseded by the 6 bit Differentiated Services
                    Field (DSField, RFC 3260) and the 2 bit Explicit
                    Congestion Notification Field (ECN field, RFC 3168).
                    Network operators should avoid specifying values of 
                    docsQosParamSetTosAndMask and docsQosParamSetTosORMask 
                    which would result in the modification of the ECN 
                    bits.

                    In particular, operators should not use values of 
                    docsQosParamSetTosAndMask which have either of the 
                    least-significant two bits set to 0.  Similarly, 
                    operators should not use values of 
                    docsQosParamSetTosORMask which have either of the 
                    least-significant two bits set to 1. 

                    Even though the this object is only enforced by the
                    Cable Modem Termination System (CMTS),
                    Cable Modems must report the value as signaled in
                    the referenced parameter."
    REFERENCE      "SP-RFIv1.1-I10-037030, Appendix C.2.2.6.10;
                    RFC 3168, The Addition of Explicit Congestion 
                    Notification (ECN) to IP;
                    RFC 3260, New Terminology and Clarifications for
                    Diffserv."
    ::= { docsQosParamSetEntry 21 }





Gmane