The MPLS WG Archive[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index] consensus to make draft-kompella-mpls-te-mib-00.txt a TEWG it em?
My $0.02 on this... >> So, with that said - I'd like to see what the consensus of >> the list is. >> >> Should Kireeti's draft >> a) be accepted as a TE WG item at this time? >> b) not be accepted as a TE WG item at this time? I believe that this should NOT move forward as a tewg item at this time. I suggest that it could be the role of the tewg to - produce a TE MIB that is independent of MPLS - produce a set of requirements on the MPLS TE MIB and request (insist?) that the mplswg incorporate them I suggest that it is the role of the mplswg to - produce a fully functional MIB (set of MIBs) that can be used to configure, manage and observe an MPLS TE network - take input from implementers, operators and those with particular TE experience Having had considerable experience with the mplswg MIBs I feel that there _is_ considerable overlap between the MIBs and that much of what Kireeti shows in his MIB can be found in the mplswg MIB. On the other hand, there are other functions that are "new" in Kireeti's MIB that would be of value in the mplswg MIBs, and my view is that the authors of the mplswg MIBs must incorporate them. I cannot understand why it would not be a valuable use of the conformance statement and conformance units to produce a single combined MIB where the function of Kireeti's MIB can be achieved by legally supporting just a subset of the objects in the mplswg MIBs. Would the authors (on both sides) like to comment on whether this is feasible, or indeed whether they have already started discussions on this topic? Regards, Adrian -- Adrian Farrel mailto:af@datcon.co.uk Network Convergence Group Data Connection Ltd., Chester, UK http://www.datcon.co.uk/ Tel: +44 (0) 1244 313440 Fax: +44 (0) 1244 312422
|
|