| Change Request 0003 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 20.2.2, 20.28.2, 12.14 - Inconsistent VID for Loopback Reply (LBR) frames | 26-Mar-11 |
|
| Published | 26-Mar-11 |
| 20.2.2, 20.28.2, 12.14 - Inconsistent VID for Loopback Reply (LBR) frames |
| Not Discussed | 8-May-11 |
| |
| The issue was discussed in Santa Fe and since the issue was introduced from 802.1aq, we can put the resolution in 802.1aq. The resolution is acceptable but it should specify to copy both priority and drop eligible bits. Steve Haddock will introduce a comment to 802.1aq in San Francisco. Move to balloting state. | 18-Jul-11 |
| |
| Comment has been introduced and accepted, but not put into the draft. The draft is in recirc at the moment. Comment will be resubmitted. Leaving balloting state | 14-Sep-11 |
| |
| Document is still in sponsor ballot. Comment is being address, but no status change for this meeting. | 8-Nov-11 |
| |
| Document is still in sponsor ballot. Comment is being address, but no status change for this meeting. | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1aq has completed Sponsor Ballot. Expected to approve sending to RevCom in March
| 6-Mar-12 |
| |
" "
| 802.1aq was published
| 17-Jul-12 |
| |
"
| Change Request 0005 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | D4 and LLDP-EXT-DOT1-V2-MIB.mib - Missing enable for Link Aggregation TLV | 17-Jun-11 |
|
| Published | 17-Jun-11 |
| D4 and LLDP-EXT-DOT1-V2-MIB.mib - Missing enable for Link Aggregation TLV |
| We agree there is a problem and are fairly sure the solution is correct, but would need to combine the changes in the MIB and check the MIB with an expert. Perhaps it could be included in DNRI or 802.1AX, but there are no plans to modify LLDP MIB in these at this point. This also brings up the issue of whether 802.1AX allows LLDP to be sent on the physical link as well as on the aggregate. This should go into the next revision of 802.1AX and DNRI is an ammendment. We may need to consider a revision at a future meeting. Also, the non-LinkAgg issues would not be covered by this proposed course of action. Move to awaiting ballot | 18-Jul-11 |
| |
| The extension MIB is open in Qbg and we could fix some of the relevant bits, but this is in working group recirc. The best long-term answer solution is to put this in AX, but we don’t have a revision scheduled. Since there is really no new information to change the urgency, we will leave this in its current state. Resolution could be related to 0009 to be discussed in Nanjing | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Still waiting for a project, but as discussed in 0009, we will be revising the AXbq PAR to be a full revision, so this will get incorporated there. | 8-Nov-11 |
| |
| AX-Rev PAR has not yet been developed, but will be in Munich. Contributions for this will be entertained once the AX-Rev project is created | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
| AX-Rev is in task group ballot. A comment to resolve this has been submitted by Pat Thaler. Subsequent resolution will be handled in the task group | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
| This was originally put in on .1AXrev draft01, .1AXrev editor will ensure this comment is included for discussion. Subsequent resolution will be handled in the task group | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| 1AXrev editor will ensure this comment is included for discussion. Subsequent resolution will be handled in the .1AXrev task group. | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Resolution will be handled in the .1AXrev task group. | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Resolution will be handled in the .1AXrev task group. | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Resolution will be handled in the .1AXrev task group. | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| .1AXrev in TG ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev in TG ballot
| 15-Jul-13 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev in TG ballot
| 3-Sep-13 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev in WG ballot
| 12-Nov-13 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev in WG ballot
| 22-Jan-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev going to sponsor ballot
| 18-Mar-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 14-May-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
"
| 802.1AX-2014 is approved | 15-Jan-15 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0006 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | various - Corrigendum items agreed to in AVB TG | 23-Jun-11 |
|
| Published | 23-Jun-11 |
| various - Corrigendum items agreed to in AVB TG |
| 802.1AS has a corrigendum PAR under consideration and all of these bugs and all future bugs found by the task group will be addressed through the corrigendum project. We do not recommend TG members to use the maintenance system for 802.1AS bugs as long as the corrigendum project is active, however, if the system is used, we will progress the requests and use the corrigendum as a delivery vehicle as long as it is still active. Move to awaiting ballot. | 18-Jul-11 |
| |
| AB Corr PAR has been approved, but a draft has not yet been circulated for ballot. Once this goes to ballot we need to validate the items are covered and then change the state to balloting. Leave in Ready for Ballot state for now. | 14-Sep-11 |
| |
| No status change, will likely enter balloting next meeting | 8-Nov-11 |
| |
| No status change, will likely enter balloting next meeting. Initial official draft of as-cor-1 will be produced for Munich | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
| Initial official draft of AS-Cor-1 has been produced but no ballot run yet. AVB TG is keeping track of the bugs that need fixing in AS-Cor-1. If they come across an issue that they would like to save for later, they will need to file a maintenance item to track it. | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
| Initial official draft of AS-Cor-1 has been produced but no ballot run yet. AVB TG is keeping track of the bugs that need fixing in AS-Cor-1. | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| No update from AVB | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
"
| AS-Cor-1 in WG ballot.
AVB TG is keeping track of the bugs that need fixing in AS-Cor-1. | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| AS-Cor-1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0007 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.6 - incorrect operPointToPointMAC references | 01-Aug-11 |
|
| Published | 1-Aug-11 |
| 10.6 - incorrect operPointToPointMAC references |
| We should just fix this in any amendment to Q, this could be done in aq or Qbg. It would be better to have a TG chair submit a comment against Qbg to get it fixed – do it now rather than wait for another draft. Action: Paul to submit late Qbg comments. Move to balloting phase. The comments have been added to Qbg and addressed as part of the ballot resolution coming out of the Nanjing interim. Move to Balloting state | 14-Sep-11 |
| |
| Qbg is still in working group recirculation ballot, but the comment has been address in the last phase. | 8-Nov-11 |
| |
| No comments, but Qbg running another re-circ | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
"
| No comments against this in Qbg in recirc. Expected to close
| 6-Mar-12 |
| |
"
| Qbg was published | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| Change Request 0008 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | A.21 - MVRP cut-and-paste errors | 08-Aug-11 |
|
| Published | 8-Aug-11 |
| A.21 - MVRP cut-and-paste errors |
| Since this is similar to 0007, do the same resolution. Comments have been made and are processed as part of Qbg ballot out of Nanjing. Move to Balloting state | 14-Sep-11 |
| |
| Qbg is still in working group recirculation ballot, but the comment has been address in the last phase. | 8-Nov-11 |
| |
| No comments, but Qbg running another re-circ | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
| No comments against this in Qbg in recirc. Expected to close | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
| Qbg was published | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| “MVRP” change was made in Qbg, but references (10.8 & 11.2) were not changed. Complete references changes in Q-REV | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Include in Qrev | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Include in Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0009 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | D.2.7 - Disambiguating LLDP over Link Aggregations | 08-Sep-11 |
|
| Published | 8-Sep-11 |
| D.2.7 - Disambiguating LLDP over Link Aggregations |
| We believe have a new feature requirement for 802.1AX and it is needed to send/receive at the physical layer. This aspect could be put into AXbq. The solution would involve some Y layer as a shim. If we want to de-multiplex frames then we would either need new addresses or content specific multiplexing. The way it currently works is that you would see multiple peers at the aggregate layer and one of the physical links would see two peers while others would only see one. This is most likely the desirable behavior. Doing the Y based on protocol is a slippery slope (e.g. it would be protocol specific – the LLDP Y as a shim). We would rather not create a new destination address. Discuss this at the Interim via a submission by Jeff, Paul and Norm. Leave in received state for now. As discussed at the Interim in Nanjing during the joint session, AXbq will consider addressing the issue of transmitting/receivign LLDP at the physical layer and changes to TLVs or MIBs will be held for a future revision of AX | 14-Sep-11 |
| |
| The editor of AXbq agreed to address these issue, but a scope change is needed in the project. The maintenance TG agreed that we should convert AXbq to a full revision project. Alternatives such as a separate amendment project were discussed but rejected. Motions will be required on Thursday to pre-circulate the new PAR. This may require a change in the project name to AX-Rev (we think). We will need to revise the PAR at the interim. AXbk will still finish and go to sponsor ballot. The based text of AXbk will be rolled into AX-Rev. No change in status since there is no agreed fix yet. | 8-Nov-11 |
| |
| To be discussed as part of AX-Rev | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
| To be discussed as part of AX-Rev. Pat Thaler has incorporate a comment against the current task group ballot, so subsequent resolution will be handled there. | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
| To be discussed as part of AX-Rev. subsequent resolution will be handled there. | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| Included in the current draft of AX-REV | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Included in the current draft of AX-REV | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Included in the current draft of AX-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Resolution will be handled in the .1AXrev task group. | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| .1AXrev in TG ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev in TG ballot
| 15-Jul-13 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev in TG ballot
| 3-Sep-13 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev in WG ballot
| 12-Nov-13 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev in WG ballot
| 22-Jan-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev going to sponsor ballot
| 18-Mar-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 14-May-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
"
| 802.1AX-2014 is approved | 15-Jan-15 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0010 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 6.11.4 - Incorrect Annex reference | 13-Sep-11 |
|
| Published | 13-Sep-11 |
| 6.11.4 - Incorrect Annex reference |
| Also make a comment against Qbg to fix this one as done with 0007 and 0008. Comments have been made and are processed as part of Qbg ballot out of Nanjing. Move to Balloting state | 14-Sep-11 |
| |
| Qbg is still in working group recirculation ballot, but the comment has been address in the last phase. | 8-Nov-11 |
| |
| No comments, but Qbg running another re-circ | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
| No comments, and Qbg will be going to RevCom soon | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
| Qbg was published | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| Change Request 0011 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | I.5 - No recommended priority to traffic class mappings for credit-based shaper in table 8-4 | 14-Sep-11 |
|
| Published | 14-Sep-11 |
| I.5 - No recommended priority to traffic class mappings for credit-based shaper in table 8-4 |
"
| Normative text is correct in 34, but if someone was looking at the non-normative text this could cause a problem. The group felt this problem was significant enough to justify a corrigendum project. The editor believes the corrigendum can be done quickly.
The corrigendum PAR would be written to identify the technical change and then bundle in known typos which are potentially maintenance items (0012, 0013, 0015, 0017). It is possible to raise this PAR during this meeting. | 8-Nov-11 |
| |
"
| Some related comments about the description of the table in initial TG ballot that needs discussion – propose accepting the comment #9 from Pat Thaler. Don Fedyk also points out an issue with the relation to table I-1 in comment #22. Propose putting in a note before table I-4. We could remove table I-1 all together, or simply state that it is an example and keep a note in-front of I-4 that indicates it is not applicable. Removing I-1 could be more intrusive. | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
| Updated in Q-Cor-2-d0-1 to match previous meeting consensus | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor-2-d2-0 in sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 submitted to RevCom | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 approved by SASB | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 was published November 2012 | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0012 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 26.8 - Missing MEP/MHF icons in fig 26-2 | 29-Sep-11 |
|
| Published | 29-Sep-11 |
| 26.8 - Missing MEP/MHF icons in fig 26-2 |
"
| This is also a candidate for corrigendum PAR as well, but the figure is not normative.
There is also a plan to create an addition of Q and it should be determined if this can be addressed in the roll-up. We believe not, but we need to check of editorial changes can be made to the base document in the roll-up.
| 8-Nov-11 |
| |
"
| No comments were submitted against this fix in Q-cor-2. | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
| No comments were submitted against this fix in Q-cor-2. | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor-2-d2-0 in sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 submitted to RevCom | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 approved by SASB | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 was published November 2012 | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0013 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 5.4.4, 5.16.3 - MRP address for MSRP does not exist | 27-Oct-11 |
|
| Published | 27-Oct-11 |
| 5.4.4, 5.16.3 - MRP address for MSRP does not exist |
| Candidate for the corrigendum as a known typo. Move to ready for balloting. | 8-Nov-11 |
| |
| Comment by Don Fedyk that ‘and’ should be ‘or’. To be discussed in Munich. Addresses is in all the tables and thus should remain ‘and’. Comment rejected, so no change for q-cor-2. | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
| Updated in Q-Cor-2-d0-1 to match previous meeting consensus | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor-2-d2-0 in sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 submitted to RevCom | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 approved by SASB | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 was published November 2012 | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0014 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 6.6.1, 9.2.7.7.2, 10.5.2 - LLDP TLV error processing | 7-Nov-11 |
|
| Published | 7-Nov-11 |
| 6.6.1, 9.2.7.7.2, 10.5.2 - LLDP TLV error processing |
| Since there is no open AB amendment we put this in the ready for ballot phase. Note that AB at some point it would be good to remove the Annex of AB for .1 and .3 TLVs. | 8-Nov-11 |
| |
| No status change. Previously agreed to wait for AB document amendment or revision to address. | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
| No status change. Previously agreed to wait for AB document amendment or revision to address. New maintenance item 0027 includes this fix and additional clarification. | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
"
| New maintenance item 0027 includes this fix and additional clarification.
Target for 802.1AB Cor (PAR approved at July plenary) | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
"
| Included in the current draft of AB-Cor1 that is in TG ballot. | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| AB-Cor1 in WG ballot | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| AB-Cor1 in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AB-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AB-Cor-1 submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| 802.1AB-Cor1 was published on June 14, 2013 | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0015 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | A.31 - Clause number issue impacts PICS | 8-Nov-11 |
|
| Published | 8-Nov-11 |
| A.31 - Clause number issue impacts PICS |
| Candidate for the corrigendum as a known typo. Move to ready for balloting. | 8-Nov-11 |
| |
| No comments submitted against this during Q-Cor-2 ballot. | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
| No comments were submitted against this fix in Q-cor-2. | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor-2-d2-0 in sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 submitted to RevCom | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 approved by SASB | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 was published November 2012 | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0020 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.8.1.2, 10.8.2.8 - Inconsistent text when NumberOfValues is zero | 21-Dec-11 |
|
| Published | 21-Dec-11 |
| 10.8.1.2, 10.8.2.8 - Inconsistent text when NumberOfValues is zero |
| There is a need to send a LeaveAll with no attributes. See 10.8.2.10.1. The BNF text is not consistent. Since cor-2 is in TG ballot this could be considered for this document. We would like to stop adding items to a cor-2 when going to WG ballot unless there is a catastrophic error to address. | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
| Updated in Q-Cor-2-d0-1 to match previous meeting consensus | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor-2-d2-0 in sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 submitted to RevCom | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 approved by SASB | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 was published November 2012 | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0021 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | D2.9.7 - TC must be configured for ETS to specify bandwidth | 06-Jan-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Jan-12 |
| D2.9.7 - TC must be configured for ETS to specify bandwidth |
| It needs to be possible to configure the TCs, but not necessarily enable them for ETS yet because of timing constraints and can’t be made to work otherwise. The proposed solution doesn’t work, but what to do is still somewhat unclear. If bandwidth is assigned to a non-TC class the left over should be distributed to the other classes. This is described in 37.3.c. We could add a note here to clarify the above. It could read something like 5.4.1.6. Leave this in the received state until we have a vehicle to incorporate the fix. | 11-Jan-12 |
| |
"
| Since the Q-Cor-2 is by necessity having to address items that are amendments to Q-Rev, it is conceivable that we can incorporate a small change to address this item. Anoop has proposed the following text to the end of Clause D.2.9.7
NOTE--While it is intended that only TCs configured for ETS will have a bandwidth value associated with them, it is possible, during configuration changes, to have situations where a TC is not configured for ETS but has a non-zero TCBandwidth percentage. In this case, the sum of all the TCBandwidth percentages must still be 100, but the TC bandwidth percentages of the non-ETS TCs would effectively be unused bandwidth and reallocated to the ETS TCs. | 14-Mar-12 |
| |
"
| Q-Cor-2-d2-0 in sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 submitted to RevCom | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 approved by SASB | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 was published November 2012 | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0025 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 6.10 - Table for learned B-MAC addresses in PIP | 6-Feb-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Feb-12 |
| 6.10 - Table for learned B-MAC addresses in PIP |
"
| How the connection_identifier value is used to obtain the B-MAC address is really implementation specific. There was a specific comment during the development of this to make sure the connection_identifier was an indirect reference to the actual MAC address and not explicit. This also allows the connection_identifier to contain other values for other port types (e.g. Port Extension). There was and is a strong desire to NOT have a learning/ageing function for this capability, so no additional table is required. Given this, we really don’t have a problem here, but a clarification could be helpful and two proposals are on the table; Make the connection_identifier explicitly a MAC address for CBPs or insert a note that indicates this is implementation specific and in the case of a 1:1 mapping does not require any learning/ageing and can be stored in the existing FDB. Add the following note just before the beginning of 6.10.1:
Note -- There is a 1:1 relationship between a given value of the connection_identifier and a backbone MAC address. This level of indirection is provided to allow the use of the connection_identifier parameter for other purposes by other types of Bridge Ports. The relationship between a given connection_identifier value and a backbone MAC address is maintained as long any FDB entry contains this value for the connection_identifier. No ageing mechanism other than that specified for Dynamic FDB entries is implied.
| 14-Mar-12 |
| |
"
| Q-Cor-2-d2-0 in sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 submitted to RevCom | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 approved by SASB | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 was published November 2012 | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0026 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Rejected | 22.1,22.5 - Flow Classification and Queuing for CBP | 6-Feb-12 |
|
| Rejected | 6-Feb-12 |
| 22.1,22.5 - Flow Classification and Queuing for CBP |
"
| The general belief is that the scope of changes required to address this item are beyond the current scope vehicles that are open. Any changes here would be effectively undoing previous agreements and thus this item will be left in the ‘received’ state for consideration in a future revision. This item is related to 0023 as well with similar resolution. The location of the queuing functions (8.6.6) are documented and are above the 6.11 functions. The location of flow classification (8.6.5) is more tricky. It was specifically taken out of figure 22-2 in the 2011 revision because it is not possible to place it in the figure unambiguously. The flow meters operate on all frames received at a port that have at least one eligible egress port after being processed by the active topology enforcement, ingress filtering, frame filtering, and egress filtering functions. There is no place in Figure 22-2 that that corresponds to this. Other alternatives would be to remove Figure 22-2 entirely, or to restructure it so that all the filtering functions, including frame filtering and egress filtering, are shown on the ingress path and the results of this filtering carried explictly to the relay.
Either of these would have substantial ripple effects in the text surrounding the Figure and in the rest of the document. | 14-Mar-12 |
| |
" "
| The general belief is that the scope of changes required is too large to address this proposal as a maintenance item. Thus this item will be ‘rejected’ ‐ the commenter may pursue this in a future Q revision (PAR approved at July plenary). This item is related to 0023 as well with similar resolution.
| 17-Jul-12 |
| |
"
| Change Request 0027 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 6.6.1, 8.2 - End of LLDPDU TLV error handling | 6-Feb-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Feb-12 |
| 6.6.1, 8.2 - End of LLDPDU TLV error handling |
| Group discussed choices to resolve this. One easy way is to make the TLV optional instead of mandatory. It already is effectively optional since it isn’t validated on receipt, though we stress it must be present on transmit. The other option is to clearly document the current situation which is the intent of the proposed resolution in the maintenance item. To be discussed with a broader audience at the plenary | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
"
| Group discussed choices to resolve this. One easy way is to make the TLV optional instead of mandatory. It already is effectively optional since it isn’t validated on receipt, though we stress it must be present on transmit. The other option is to clearly document the current situation which is the intent of the proposed resolution in the maintenance item. Agreed to use the existing approach.
Target for 802.1AB Cor (PAR approved at July plenary)
| 17-Jul-12 |
| |
"
| Included in the current draft of AB-Cor1 that is in TG ballot. | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| AB-Cor1 in WG ballot | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| AB-Cor1 in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AB-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AB-Cor-1 submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| 802.1AB-Cor1 was published on June 14, 2013 | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0029 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.5.2, IEEE8021-BRIDGE-MIB - Missing T-Component creation text and ennumeration | 14-Feb-12 |
|
| Published | 14-Feb-12 |
| 17.5.2, IEEE8021-BRIDGE-MIB - Missing T-Component creation text and ennumeration |
| Propose inclusion to next draft of Q-Cor-2. There is, however, a ripple effect as there is no text on how to create a T-Component port as well. Ben will propose some text for Tony to review at the plenary and to incorporate into the next draft. | 6-Mar-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor-2-d2-0 in sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 submitted to RevCom | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 approved by SASB | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 was published November 2012 | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0032 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 8.5.8 - System Capabilities TLV inconsistent text and figure | 20-Mar-12 |
|
| Published | 20-Mar-12 |
| 8.5.8 - System Capabilities TLV inconsistent text and figure |
"
| The length should be 4. Revise figure 8-10 by removing the chassis ID subtype field.
The fix is targeted for AB-Cor (PAR approved at July plenary) | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
"
| Included in the current draft of AB-Cor1 that is in TG ballot. | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| AB-Cor1 in WG ballot | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| AB-Cor1 in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AB-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AB-Cor-1 submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| 802.1AB-Cor1 was published on June 14, 2013 | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0033 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 13.29.32 - Inconsistency of text for updtDigest() | 20-Apr-12 |
|
| Published | 20-Apr-12 |
| 13.29.32 - Inconsistency of text for updtDigest() |
"
| Agreed resolution as proposed. Notably, in clause 13.29.32 updtDigest():
replace ""Updates agreeDigest, agreeN, and agreedND"" with ""Updates agreeDigest and agreeN"".
Replace all five occurences of ""agreeND"" with ""agreedND"",
Replace all four occurrences of ""agreedND"" with ""agreeND""
Agree to include in Q-Cor-2
| 17-Jul-12 |
| |
"
| Q-Cor2 submitted to RevCom | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 approved by SASB | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Q-Cor2 was published November 2012 | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0034 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 8.5.8 - System Capabilities TLV incorrectly includes chassis ID | 21-Jun-12 |
|
| Published | 21-Jun-12 |
| 8.5.8 - System Capabilities TLV incorrectly includes chassis ID |
"
| Same issues as 0032. The length should be 4. Revise figure 8-10 by removing the chassis ID subtype field.
The fix is targeted for AB-Cor (PAR approved at July plenary) | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
"
| Included in the current draft of AB-Cor1 that is in TG ballot. | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| AB-Cor1 in WG ballot | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| AB-Cor1 in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AB-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AB-Cor-1 submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| 802.1AB-Cor1 was published on June 14, 2013 | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0036 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 20.9.1 - MEPactive is administrative status | 21-Jun-12 |
|
| Published | 21-Jun-12 |
| 20.9.1 - MEPactive is administrative status |
"
| This needs to be studied. When can the operational state differ from the administative state? If these are significant then separate obejcts may be needed.
If so, this would be targeted for 802.1Q revision | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
" "
| MEPactive regulates all of the MEP state machines in parallel with BEGIN. There is not much opportunity for foul ups that would make an operational and an administrative pair for MEP active that would not be visible from the ieee8021CfmConfigErrorListTable.
The MEPactive variable controls all of the MEP state machines by holding them in the reset condition. The current description is adequate to convey the meaning of the variable. It does not appear that the suggested text has a significantly different meaning than the current text of 20.9.1 or the dot1agCfmMepActive MIB object.
Agree to add a note explaining why an Operational state is not needed. Norm Finn will draft text -- Include in Q-REV
| 12-Sep-12 |
| |
" "
| Add a note to end of 20.9.1 explaining why an Operational state is not needed.
NOTE--MEPactive controls the BEGIN input to the MEP state machines. Therefore, for any MEP that has been completely configured, it is as much an indication of the operative state of the MEP as a control over that state.
Include in Q-REV
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0038 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 6 - user_priority -> priority | 21-Jun-12 |
|
| Published | 21-Jun-12 |
| 6 - user_priority -> priority |
| Not discussed yet. Target for Q-rev if needed | 17-Jul-12 |
| |
"
| The intent is that 6.1 and 6.7 will be removed from 802.1Q as part of the alignment with 802.1AC, so only the additional instances will need to be changed to “user priority”
Target for 802.1Q revision | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
"
| Target for 802.1Q-REV | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0041 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 35 - SRP title | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 35 - SRP title |
| Agreed. Target for 802.1Q-REV | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Target for 802.1Q-REV | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0042 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.3 - MRP Attribute Propagation | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 10.3 - MRP Attribute Propagation |
| Mick Seaman will review the MRP set and report back on recommendation | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Review by Mick Seaman in progress. | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| The proposed text says exactly the same thing as the existing text (how could we possibly discussing attributes for another context, doesn't make sense). However the change is clearly harmless and acceptable.
Include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
"
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0043 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.7.6.1 - MRPDU transmission actions | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 10.7.6.1 - MRPDU transmission actions |
"
| There appears to be no conflict given the introduction “unless stated otherwise” and the suggested conflict falls into this case. The action definitions are part of the state machine.
Mick Seaman will review the MRP set and report back on recommendation | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
"
| Review by Mick Seaman in progress. | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Agree. The offending (clearly wrong) text about transmitting only if the Port was in a Forwarding state was the result of incorrectly accepting a ballot comment at some stage in the process. It is very clear that if the MAP Context no longer provides connectivity between points A and B and an attribute registration was previously being forwarded from A to B, then the registration has to be explicitly withdrawn by B sending a Leave (or some equivalent action).
Include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
"
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0045 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.7.5.2 - Flush! | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 10.7.5.2 - Flush! |
"
| This was discussed in 802.1ak D7.0 PDIS comment 45 (Nov 2006)
REJECT: As this is an efficiency issue this kind of change needs more detailed study.
Panos suggest that he believes the “Lv” may have been deleted by accident
Mick Seaman will review the MRP set and report back on recommendation | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
"
| Review by Mick Seaman in progress. | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| This was discussed in 802.1ak D7.0 PDIS comment 45 (Nov 2006) and was rejected ""As this is an efficiency issue this kind of change needs more detailed study.""
However, Panos notes that he believes the “Lv” was deleted by accident.
Mick Seaman proposes to accept.
Agree. Include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
"
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0046 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 11.2.3.2.1 - Initiating VLAN membership declaration | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 11.2.3.2.1 - Initiating VLAN membership declaration |
| Mick Seaman will review the MVRP set and report back on recommendation | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Review by Mick Seaman in progress. | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Agree.
Include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
"
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0047 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.7.2, 11.2.1.3 - Registrar Administrative Controls | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 10.7.2, 11.2.1.3 - Registrar Administrative Controls |
| Mick Seaman will review the MVRP set and report back on recommendation | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Review by Mick Seaman in progress. | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Agree. Favour the alternative suggestion because otherwise some considerable attention would have to be addressed to defining ""first"" in ""When ... first"" to include cases where BEGIN has been asserted and/or machines reinitialized
Include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
"
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0048 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 11.2.5 - Use of "new" declaration capability | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 11.2.5 - Use of "new" declaration capability |
| Mick Seaman will review the MVRP set and report back on recommendation | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Review by Mick Seaman in progress. | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Agree
Include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
"
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0049 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 35.2.4.5 - MAP Context for MSRP | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 35.2.4.5 - MAP Context for MSRP |
| Agreed. Target for 802.1Q-REV | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Target for 802.1Q-REV | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0050 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 5.4.4, 10.3, 35.2.4 - MSRP requirements | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 5.4.4, 10.3, 35.2.4 - MSRP requirements |
"
| Craig Gunther proposes alternative to change text in 10.3 (i.e., the pointer is an extension to MAP instead of a full definition for MSRP) and will propose text
Target for 802.1Q-REV | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
" "
| Accept the Proposed Resolution in Principle, but use an entirely different approach:
Clause 10.3, page 157
The MRP Attribute Propagation (MAP) function enables propagation of attributes registered on Bridge Ports across the network to other participants. Each MRP application specifies the operation of the MAP function. This subclause specifies the operation of the MAP function for the MMRP application, the MVRP application (11.2.1) and the MSRP application (35.2). In addition, clause 35.2.4 specifies additional MSRP attribute processing rules that modify the MAP function defined below.
Clause 35.2.4, page 1129
This clause describes
a) Rules for combining and propagating Listener attributes toward the associated Talker,
b) How MSRP adjusts the Talker and Listener attributes before propagating them.
Unless stated otherwise, Talker and Listener attributes are propagated as described in 10.3.
In principle, the MAP performs MSRP Attribute Propagation when any of the following conditions occur:
Change bar version in minutes (http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/maint/2012-11-maintenance.pdf )
Target for 802.1Q-REV | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0051 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 35.2.2.8.7 - FailureInformation | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 35.2.2.8.7 - FailureInformation |
| Agreed. Target for 802.1Q-REV | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
| Target for 802.1Q-REV | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0052 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 35.2.1.4(c) - streamAge | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 35.2.1.4(c) - streamAge |
| Agree in principle, Craig Gunther will review to confirm the wording is accurate and report back. | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
"
| Insert “per-port” back into the Proposed Resolution:
c) streamAge: A per-port per-stream 32-bit unsigned value used to represent the time, in seconds, since the control element for the associated port most recently became forwarding in the Dynamic Reservations Entries (8.8.7) corresponding to the stream’s destination_address. This value is used when determining which streams have been configured the longest. Streams with a numerically larger streamAge are considered to be configured earlier than other streams, and therefore carry a higher implicit importance.
Target for 802.1Q-REV
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0053 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.14 - streamAge in IEEE8021-SRP MIB module | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 17.7.14 - streamAge in IEEE8021-SRP MIB module |
| Agree in principle, Craig Gunther will review to confirm the wording is accurate and report back. | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
"
| Accept the Proposed Resolution as-is:
Clause 17.7.14, page 841
""The number of seconds since the reservation was established on this port.""
Target for 802.1Qrev
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0054 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 35.2.4.5 - MAP Context for MSRP | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 35.2.4.5 - MAP Context for MSRP |
"
| Proposal is: “All MSRPDUs sent by MSRP Participants Bridges are transmitted as untagged frames.”
Andre Fredette will study this, compare to 11.2.3.1.1 & 2, and report back | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
" "
| Accept the Proposed Resolution in Principle, but use this wording:
Clause 35.2.4.5, page 1133
All MSRPDUs are transmitted as untagged frames.
Target for 802.1Qrev
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0055 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 35.2.4 - MSRP Attribute Propagation | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 35.2.4 - MSRP Attribute Propagation |
"
| Craig Gunther will study if this is necessary and report back
This is related to item 0050 | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
" "
| Agreed in Principle, see resolution to item 0050
Target for 802.1Qrev
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0056 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 35.2.4 - MSRP MAP | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 35.2.4 - MSRP MAP |
"
| Craig Gunther will study if this is necessary and report back
This is related to item 0050 | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
" "
| Agreed in Principle, see resolution to item 0050
Target for 802.1Qrev
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0057 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.3(a) - MRP Attribute Propagation | 06-Sep-12 |
|
| Published | 6-Sep-12 |
| 10.3(a) - MRP Attribute Propagation |
"
| This is editorial, but provisionally agree to make the change.
Mick Seaman will review the MRP set and report back on recommendation | 12-Sep-12 |
| |
"
| Review by Mick Seaman in progress. | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| This is editorial. Agreed.
Include in 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
"
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0058 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 6.3.3.8 - req58 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 6.3.3.8 - req58 |
"
| It should be UInteger16; tables 14-1 and 14-3 must be changed. In addition, the corresponding MIB variables have datatype Integer32 (pp. 186 and 196). It is not clear (to the main editor) if this is because there are no Integer16 or UInteger16 datatypes for MIBs. In addition, in the description field for the MIB variable on p.186, the default value is written as 410016. The '16' would be a subscript, to indicate base 16. It is realized that that subscripts are not possible in the MIB code; should this be indicated some other way (e.g., 4100 (hex) or 0x4100 -- Question for the clause 15 clause editor).
Editor will check if a change is needed for the MIB
Accept and incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0059 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.2.2.2.1 - req59 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 10.2.2.2.1 - req59 |
"
| Agree; should say 'PortSyncSyncReceive state machine'.
Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0060 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Rejected | 10.2.4.6 - req60 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Rejected | 1-Nov-12 |
| 10.2.4.6 - req60 |
"
| It is agreed there is confusion because the managed object and internal variable have the same name, while the former is a scaled version of the latter. Should we change the name of the managed object to 'scaledNeighborRateRatio'? Note that we would then have to change the name of the corresponding MIB object.
Reject
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0061 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
Complete
then Ballot | 10.2.6.1.1 - local variables | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Complete
then Ballot | 1-Nov-12 |
| 10.2.6.1.1 - local variables |
"
| It is true that fundamentally local variables in different functions or state machines can have the same name; however, it would be helpful to the user if the names of different variables were different. For example, this would facilitate searching for all instances of a variable.
If we do rename variables so that variables in different functions or state machines have different names, how should we pick the new names (e.g., append the numbers 1, 2, … to each name that is a different variable?). Also, should this change go in the corrigendum or in 802.1ASbt (since it actually is not fixing something that is incorrect; rather, it is improving the document)?
Technical review – is this appropriate for .1ASbt?
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
" "
| This is actually not fixing something that is incorrect; rather, it is improving the document, so it belongs in .1ASbt
However, the practice in 802.1 is to use unique names even for local variables. As a result, it is recommended to implement this improvement in .1ASbt
| 15-Jan-13 |
| |
" "
| It is recommended to implement this improvement in .1ASbt. Draft for this document expected after next meeting.
| 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Draft for .1ASbt expected after next meeting.
| 15-May-13 |
| |
" "
| Draft for .1ASbt expected after next meeting.
| 15-Jul-13 |
| |
" "
| An initial .1ASbt draft is available. However, as this is a significant change, the editor will do this last – perhaps in the next draft.
| 3-Sep-13 |
| |
"
| No update. | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| The editor is in process of implementing in collaboration with IEEE 1588 (that is in process of a revision) to get some alignment in the naming of terms. This process has identified a number of additional issues that the editor is in process of resolving as well. | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| No update. | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| No update. | 14-May-14 |
| |
| No update. | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| No update. | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| No update. | 6-Nov-14 |
| |
| No update. | 15-Jan-15 |
| |
| No update. | 10-Mar-15 |
| |
| No update. | 10-Mar-15 |
| |
| No update. | 10-Mar-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0062 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.3.11.2.1 - req62 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 10.3.11.2.1 - req62 |
"
| Agree. Figure 10-11 and subclause 10.3.11.2.1 should be changed ('msg‘ changed to 'message').
Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0064 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.3.11.3 - req64 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 10.3.11.3 - req64 |
"
| Agreed (the 'Designated' is RSTP terminology; this was a copy and paste error)
Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0066 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.3.11.3 - req66 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 10.3.11.3 - req66 |
"
| Agree; It seems we should not increment the counter when entering the AGED state from DISABLED, as there has not been an Announce receipt timeout in this case. Should have the qualification on the counter (the first suggestion).
Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1 | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0068 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 8.5.2.2.1 - req68 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 8.5.2.2.1 - req68 |
| Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1 | 13-Nov-12 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0069 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.3.12.1.4 - req69 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 10.3.12.1.4 - req69 |
"
| This is already incorporated in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0070 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.3.12.1.4 - req70 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 10.3.12.1.4 - req70 |
"
| Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0071 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 10.2.6.2.1 - req71 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 10.2.6.2.1 - req71 |
"
| Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0072 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 11.1.3 - req72 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 11.1.3 - req72 |
"
| Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0073 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 11.1.3 - req73 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 11.1.3 - req73 |
"
| Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0074 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 11.2.13.2.1 - req74 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 11.2.13.2.1 - req74 |
"
| Agree. It should say ""lastGmFreqChange is set equal to the scaledLastGmFreqChange of the most recently received Follow_Up message, multiplied by 2^41.”
Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0076 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 11.2.15.2.3 - req76 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 11.2.15.2.3 - req76 |
"
| Agree
Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0077 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 11.2.13.3 - req77 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 11.2.13.3 - req77 |
"
| Agree; this will be added to the state machine.
Incorporate in P802.1AS‐Cor‐1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0078 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 11.2.15.3 - req78 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 11.2.15.3 - req78 |
"
| Agree; 'pdelayRateRatio' should be 'neighborRateRatio'.
Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0079 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 11.2.16.1 - req79 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 11.2.16.1 - req79 |
"
| Agree
Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0080 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 11.4.2.3 - req80 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 11.4.2.3 - req80 |
"
| Agree; also should be capitalized in 10.5.2.2.6.
Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0081 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 14.6.25 - req81 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 14.6.25 - req81 |
"
| syncReceiptTimoutTimeInterval should be syncReceiptTimeoutTimeInterval.
Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0082 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 14.7.9 - req82 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Published | 1-Nov-12 |
| 14.7.9 - req82 |
"
| Agreed
Incorporate in P802.1AS-Cor-1
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| 802.1AS-Cor1 is in WG ballot | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 is in sponsor ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-May-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 to be submitted to RevCom | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| AS-Cor-1 D3.1 approved by RevCom/SASB, to be published shortly | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1AS-Cor1 was published on Sept 10, 2013 | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0083 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Rejected | A.5 - req83 | 01-Nov-12 |
|
| Rejected | 1-Nov-12 |
| A.5 - req83 |
"
| Note that 802.1AS does not currently define “listener only” systems. Instead, it indicates that a time-aware system may or may not be grandmaster-capable. But, a time-aware system that is not grandmaster capable may hav more than one port.
It appears that, when the commenter talks about a ""listener-only"" system, the commenter is referring to a time-aware system that is not grandmaster-capable and has only one port. It is true that for this case some of the requirements are not applicable. However, 802.1AS does not specifically consider this special case. IEEE 1588 does talk about ""slave-only"" clocks, and in 1588 these have just one port, but that is because 1588 has not introduced the notion of a boundary clock that is not GM-capable but has many ports. (The fact that 802.1AS has introduced such a device is ok becauase 802.1AS uses an alternate BMCA, not the 1588 default BMCA.) The question here is whether 802.1AS should specifically distinguish the requirements for single-port devices that are not grandmaster-capable.
In any case, this could certainly be addressed, though it belongs in 802.1ASbt (i.e., the amendment) rather than the corrigendum. This is not a bug fix.
Since the other AVB standards do talk about “listener-only” systems, it could be helpful, and more friendly, to the user if 802.1AS also described this case
Defer, Technical review of possible feature addition to P802.1ASbt
| 13-Nov-12 |
| |
"
| Reject, this is an enhancement request. It will be considered as a possible feature addition to P802.1ASbt | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
| Change Request 0086 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Annex D.2.13 - EVB LTV | 09-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Jan-13 |
| Annex D.2.13 - EVB LTV |
"
| Agreed. This was already discussed on the mailing list and the resolution is consistent with that discussion.
Target for 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
"
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0087 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.7.1 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-CFM MIB module | 09-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Jan-13 |
| 17.7.7.1 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-CFM MIB module |
"
| Agreed
Target for 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
"
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0088 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Annex D - IEEE 802.1 Organizationally Specific TLVs | 09-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Jan-13 |
| Annex D - IEEE 802.1 Organizationally Specific TLVs |
"
| Technical review – Norm Finn, Steve Haddock, Pat Thaler
It appears that the position should not have changed
| 15-Jan-13 |
| |
" "
| The position should not have changed
Agree to change back to original spec in 802.1AB-2005
Editor requested to include in 802.1Qrev | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0089 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Annex D - IEEE 802.1Q TLV VID length | 09-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Jan-13 |
| Annex D - IEEE 802.1Q TLV VID length |
"
| Technical review – Norm Finn, Steve Haddock, Pat Thaler, Panos Saltsidis
The point is correct:
Clause D.2.5 page 1217
In 3rd line from bottom, change 128 to 512.
Clause D.2.5.1 page 1218
In 2nd line of paragraph, change 128 to 512.
But do we need this object? Is there any usage? | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
" "
| The point is correct:
Clause D.2.5 page 1217
In 3rd line from bottom, change 128 to 512.
Clause D.2.5.1 page 1218
In 2nd line of paragraph, change 128 to 512.
Editor requested to include in 802.1Qrev | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0090 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Annex D - IEEE 802.1AB LLDP TLVs | 09-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Jan-13 |
| Annex D - IEEE 802.1AB LLDP TLVs |
"
| Technical review – Norm Finn, Steve Haddock, Pat Thaler, Paul Congdon
The analysis in the maintenance item seems to be correct. Changes required to 802.1AB-2009:
Clause E.10.3 Table E.5 page 137:
Add ""lldpv2Xdot1RemIndex | (Table index)"" as the next-to-last entry under lldpV2Xdot1RemVidUsageDigestTable, ahead of lldpV2Xdot1RemVidUsageDigest
Add ""lldpv2Xdot1RemIndex | (Table index)"" as the next-to-last entry under lldpV2Xdot1RemManVidTable, ahead of lldpV2Xdot1RemManVid
Clause E.10.5 page 157:
Add lldpv2Xdot1RemIndex as the last INDEX in lldpV2Xdot1RemVidUsageDigestEntry.
Clause E.10.5 page 158:
Add lldpv2Xdot1RemIndex as the last INDEX in lldpV2Xdot1RemManVidEntry.
This likely requires deprecating the old lldpV2Xdot1RemVidUsageDigestTable and lldpV2Xdot1RemManVidTable and creating new ones, which of course, is a more extensive change. This note just records what the document should have said.
However, this table was apparently added per a comment by Bob Sultan. Do we need this object? Is there any usage? | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
" "
| Agree. Changes required to Annex D of 802.1Q (which was moved from 802.1AB-2009):
Clause E.10.3 Table E.5 page 137:
Add ""lldpv2Xdot1RemIndex | (Table index)"" as the next-to-last entry under lldpV2Xdot1RemVidUsageDigestTable, ahead of lldpV2Xdot1RemVidUsageDigest
Add ""lldpv2Xdot1RemIndex | (Table index)"" as the next-to-last entry under lldpV2Xdot1RemManVidTable, ahead of lldpV2Xdot1RemManVid
Clause E.10.5 page 157:
Add lldpv2Xdot1RemIndex as the last INDEX in lldpV2Xdot1RemVidUsageDigestEntry.
Clause E.10.5 page 158:
Add lldpv2Xdot1RemIndex as the last INDEX in lldpV2Xdot1RemManVidEntry.
This requires deprecating the old lldpV2Xdot1RemVidUsageDigestTable and lldpV2Xdot1RemManVidTable and creating new ones, which of course, is a more extensive change. This note just records what the document should have said.
Editor requested to include in 802.1Qrev | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0091 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 41.5.5 - VDP state machine variables and parameters | 09-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Jan-13 |
| 41.5.5 - VDP state machine variables and parameters |
"
| Technical review -- discuss on DCB conference call before next meeting
Mostly agree, however the proposed solution does not clean up all the loose ends. The MIB variable ecpOperAckTimerInit was originally intended to store the operational exponential value, however this was not conveyed correctly in the SNMP MIB. At very least clause 12 needs to be aligned with the SNMP MIB since clause 12 types this variable “timer exp”. We used units of usec in the MIB for these variables. Also the variable urpVdpResourceWaitDelay I believe was a reference to urpVdpOperRsrcWaitDelay. This also needs review for alignment between clause 41, 12, 17, and D.2. | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
" "
| The proposed solution does not clean up all the loose ends. It is clear that we used units of usec in the MIB for these variables but it should be state machine ticks of 10 usec.
Alignment is needed between clause 41, 43, 12, 17, and D.2.
The resolution is described in the slides form this meeting. Paul Bottorff will provide exact changes.
Target for 801.Qrev
| 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Paul Bottorff provided detailed text for the editor for 91, 93, 107 and others as a part of a ballot comment on 802.1Q-REV D1.0
Editor will include in draft and send for another Task Group ballot for review
Target for 801.Q-REV
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.2 that is in balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0092 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 41.5.2 - Bridge VDP state machine | 09-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Jan-13 |
| 41.5.2 - Bridge VDP state machine |
"
| Technical review -- discuss on DCB conference call before next meeting
Agree??? | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
"
| Agreed. Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0093 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 43.3.7.4, 43.3.4,12.26.1,12.27.1,41.5.5.9,41.5.5.13 - ECP State Machine Variables | 09-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Jan-13 |
| 43.3.7.4, 43.3.4,12.26.1,12.27.1,41.5.5.9,41.5.5.13 - ECP State Machine Variables |
"
| Technical review -- discuss on DCB conference call before next meeting
It seems like converting consistently to Tries is the smaller change rather than converting the state machine and MIB to Retries. The EVB TLV could change to maxTries with a 0 value to 8 tries. Alternately, we could leave the EVB TLV maxRetries and use maxTries internally by adding some statements in D.2. | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
" "
| Agree with resolutions 2-5, but do not change state machine as suggested. Instead simply change the following aspects
ackTimer = = 0 && (retries < maxRetries) to ackTimer = = 0 && (retries <= maxRetries)
ackTimer = = 0 && (retries = = maxRetries) to ackTimer = = 0 && (retries > maxRetries)
Paul Bottorff will provide revised state machine and detailed object changes.
Target for 802.1Qrev
| 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Paul Bottorff provided detailed state machine and detailed object changes for the editor as a part of a ballot comment on 802.1Q-REV D1.0
Editor will include in draft and send for another Task Group ballot for review
Target for 801.Q-REV
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.2 that is in balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0094 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.7.1 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-CFM MIB module | 09-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Jan-13 |
| 17.7.7.1 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-CFM MIB module |
"
| Agree.
Change the label into:
iccFormat(32) ICC-based format as specified in ITU-T Y.1731
Note: change the occurrence of the same label in the DESCRIPTION clause of the Dot1agCfmMaintAssocNameType TC and update the REVISION date of the MIB as well.
Target for 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jan-13 |
| |
"
| Q-REV draft prepared. Ready for WG ballot | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0096 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.6 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module | 18-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 18-Jan-13 |
| 17.7.6 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module |
| Agreed. Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0097 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.6, 13.25,17.14 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module, State machine timers and Performance parameter management | 18-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 18-Jan-13 |
| 17.7.6, 13.25,17.14 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module, State machine timers and Performance parameter management |
"
| This was 3 in 802.1w (Table 17-5) and then dot1dStpTxHoldCount of RFC 4318, of which ieee8021SpanningTreeRstpTxHoldCount is a direct derivation per 802.1Q (Table 17-5). It changed to 6 in 802.1D-2004
Agree to change to 6 in MIB and change reference to 802.1Q.
Target for 802.1Qrev
| 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0098 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.6 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module | 18-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 18-Jan-13 |
| 17.7.6 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module |
| Agreed. Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0099 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.6, 13.27.1 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module, AdminEdge | 18-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 18-Jan-13 |
| 17.7.6, 13.27.1 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module, AdminEdge |
"
| The REFERENCE for this in the MIB is to 802.1D 17.13.1 which provides no guidance on default values. The revised 802.1Q clause 13 is the appropriate reference
Accept – change DEFVAL to false and update the reference
Target for 802.1Qrev | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0100 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.6 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module | 18-Jan-13 |
|
| Published | 18-Jan-13 |
| 17.7.6 - Definitions for the IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module |
"
| There is a mismatch between clause 8, clause 12 (has more than 8) and clause 17 (differ from 12)
We need to at least add a VID-to-FID table to MIB, and deprecate the constraints. But alignment is needed. Panos Saltsidis will provide detailed text changes...
Target for 802.1Qrev | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Panos Saltsidis will propose text changes in a ballot comment…
Target for 802.1Q-REV | 15-May-13 |
| |
" "
| Panos Saltsidis has completed the following technical review:
During the SPB project discussions it has been decided to drop the dynamic aspects of VID to FID allocations as expressed though the VLAN Learning Constraints (and leave only dynamic allocations associated with the operation of SPBV (the SPVID allocation)). As a result clause 8.8.8 has been modified by IEEE Std 802.1aq-2012 to reflect these changes but unfortunately these changes are not reflected in Clause 12 or in Clause 17 which still discuss dynamic VID to FID allocations through the use of the VLAN Learning Constraints.
Here is the list of changes that are required for Clause 12 (Clause 17 should reflect those changes but my MIB expertise is limited and somebody else needs to go through those changes)
The current title of 12.10.3 The VLAN Learning Constraints managed object needs to be changed to
“12.10.3 The VID to FID allocation managed object”
The text in 12.10.3 needs to be replacing the current text with the following:
“The VID to FID allocations managed object models operations that modify, or inquire about
VID to FID allocations (8.8.8) that apply to the operation of the Learning Process and the Filtering Database. The object is modeled as a fixed-length tables, as follows:
a) A VID to FID allocation table (8.8.8) with an entry per VID supported by the implementation. Each
table entry indicates, for that VID, that there is currently
1) No allocation defined; or
2) A fixed allocation to FID X; or
3) A dynamic allocation to FID X.
NOTE- Item 3) is only applicable only for SPT Bridges and VIDs that have been reserved for use as SPVIDs.
The management operations that can be performed on the FID to VID allocations managed object are
b) Read VID to FID allocations (12.10.3.1);
c) Read FID allocation for VID (12.10.3.2);
d) Read VIDs allocated to FID (12.10.3.3);
e) Set VID to FID allocation (12.10.3.4);
f) Delete VID to FID allocation (12.10.3.5).”
Delete current clauses 12.10.3.1, 12.10.3.2, 12.10.3.3 and 12.10.3.4.
Renumber the following clauses starting from 12.10.3.1 in increasing order.
In 12.10.3.5.3, 12.10.3.6.3, and 12.10.3.7.3 (now renumbered to 12.10.3.1.3, 12.10.3.2.3, and 12.10.3.3.3) Include a NOTE
“NOTE- The indication of dynamic is only applicable only for SPT Bridges and VIDs that have been reserved for use as SPVIDs”
In 12.10.3.8.3 Outputs (now renumbered to 12.10.3.4.3 Outputs) delete item a1) and renumber subsequent sub items.
Make a global search for “VLAN Learning Constraints” and delete the associated references.
Editor is requested to include in draft for 802.1Q-REV | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
"
| Included in D1.2, 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0101 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17 - EVB Management Protocol | 09-Mar-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Mar-13 |
| 17 - EVB Management Protocol |
| Agreed. Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0102 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 42.4 - CDCP configuration variables | 09-Mar-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Mar-13 |
| 42.4 - CDCP configuration variables |
| Agreed. Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0103 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 6.13, 6.15 - Support of the ISS for attachment to a Provider Bridged Network and Support for the ISS by additional technologies | 09-Mar-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Mar-13 |
| 6.13, 6.15 - Support of the ISS for attachment to a Provider Bridged Network and Support for the ISS by additional technologies |
| Agreed. Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0104 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.18 - OID root for the IEEE8021-TEIPS MIB module | 09-Mar-13 |
|
| Published | 9-Mar-13 |
| 17.7.18 - OID root for the IEEE8021-TEIPS MIB module |
"
| This is an unfortunate error. However, there are few, if any, implementations of this MIB module so the change should be limited to this module as suggested
Change OID root (e.g., to 27) and rename module name and tables/objects (e.g., include v2 in prefix)
Include name of old tables at the beginning of the MIB module indicating they are deprecated with a strong warning that they are not to be used.
Change all usages in remainder of clause 17 to new object names
Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-rev
| 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0105 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17 - EVB Management Protocol | 19-Mar-13 |
|
| Published | 19-Mar-13 |
| 17 - EVB Management Protocol |
"
| Agree in Principle. Call new object ieee8021BridgeEvbVSIFilterFormat with values VID(1), MAC-VID(2), GroupID-VID(3), GroupID-MAC-VID(4).
Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0106 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17 - EVB Management Protocol | 19-Mar-13 |
|
| Published | 19-Mar-13 |
| 17 - EVB Management Protocol |
"
| Change ieee8021BridgeEvbVDPCounterDiscontinuity DESCRIPTION to
The time (in hundredths of a second) since the last counter discontinuity for any of the counters in the row.
Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.0, in ballot
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV D1.2 is balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0107 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 12, 17 - EVB Management Protocol | 19-Mar-13 |
|
| Published | 19-Mar-13 |
| 12, 17 - EVB Management Protocol |
"
| Agree with table changes (first is already in #93), but do not accept third proposal (deprecate objects). Instead point add the following note in the DESCRIPTION for these objects:
ieee8021BridgeEvbSysEcpAckTimer and ieee8021BridgeEvbSysEcpMaxRetries refer to EvbSysEcpDfltAckTimerInit and EvbSysEcpDfltMaxRetries in Clause 12.
Editor requested to include in 802.1Q-REV | 19-Mar-13 |
| |
" "
| Paul Bottorff provided detailed text proposal for the editor as a part of a ballot comment on 802.1Q-REV D1.0
Editor will include in 802.1Q-REV draft and send for another Task Group ballot for review
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.2 that is in balloting | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0108 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.6, 17.2.6 (table 17-10), 13.27.25, 13.27.33 - IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module - ExternalPortPathCost, InternalPortPathCost | 06-May-13 |
|
| Published | 6-May-13 |
| 17.7.6, 17.2.6 (table 17-10), 13.27.25, 13.27.33 - IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module - ExternalPortPathCost, InternalPortPathCost |
"
| Technical Review – Norm Finn. Initial view:
In Ieee8021SpanningTreePortEntry and Ieee8021MstpCistPortEntry, the PathCost variables controlling the cost of this port are an oper/admin pair. Apparently, for historical reasons, the oper cost in Ieee8021SpanningTreePortEntry is read-write but it is (properly) read-only in Ieee8021MstpCistPortEntry. But, in Ieee8021MstpPortEntry, there is only a read-write oper object, and no admin object. This makes it impossible to say, ""go back to being controlled by the link speed"" after once changing the value administratively.
Add a new admin variable to Ieee8021MstpPortEntry, with the same relationship to ieee8021MstpPortPathCost that ieee8021SpanningTreeRstpPortAdminPathCost has to ieee8021SpanningTreePortPathCost in the Ieee8021SpanningTreePortEntry.
Target for 802.1Qrev, if needed
| 15-May-13 |
| |
"
| Technical Review completed by Norm Finn and submitted as a ballot comment on 802.1Qrev. Already included in 802.1Q-REV D1.2 that is in balloting. Continue review as part of balloting of 802.1Qrev | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0109 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.3, 17.4.3 - IEEE8021-SPANNING-TREE MIB module - PathCost | 06-May-13 |
|
| Published | 6-May-13 |
| 17.7.3, 17.4.3 - IEEE8021-SPANNING-TREE MIB module - PathCost |
"
| It is not clear if any change is needed, though some revised DESCRIPTION might help to explain the background and usage.
Technical Review – Ben Mack-Crane. Initial View:
The name ""ieee8021MstpCistPortPathCost"" used in the description for ieee8021MstpCistPortAdminPathCost does not appear to exist. That is, there is no oper object to go with the admin object. It is possible that the ieee8021MstpCistPortCistPathCost object is intended to be the oper object, but its description does not appear to be consistent with this use. However, this description is eerily similar to the description for ieee8021MstpCistPathCost. If ieee8021MstpCistPortCistPathCost is intended to be the oper object its description should be changed accordingly.
Since the object is read-write the description for ieee8021SpanningTreePortPathCost would benefit from the following change: ""802.1D-1998 recommends that the default value of this parameter be in inverse proportion to the speed of the attached LAN."" changed to ""Table 13-4 recommends defaults and ranges for Port Path Cost values, in inverse proportion to the speed of the attached LAN. If this object is used to set the Path Cost it is possible to restore the default setting using the ieee8021SpanningTreeRstpPortAdminPathCost object.“
The name ""ieee8021SpanningTreePortPathCost32"" should be ""ieee8021SpanningTreePortPathCost""
Target for 802.1Qrev, if needed
| 15-May-13 |
| |
" "
| Technical Review by Ben Mack-Crane concluded on revised text as follows:
1. (p727/line 6) The name ""ieee8021MstpCistPortPathCost"" used in the description for ieee8021MstpCistPortAdminPathCost does not appear to exist. That is, there is no oper object to go with the admin object. It is possible that the ieee8021MstpCistPortCistPathCost object is intended to be the oper object, but its description does not appear to be consistent with this use. However, this description is eerily similar to the description for ieee8021MstpCistPathCost. If ieee8021MstpCistPortCistPathCost is intended to be the oper object its description should be changed accordingly.
2. (p646/line 44) Since the object is read-write the description for ieee8021SpanningTreePortPathCost would benefit from the following change:
""802.1D-1998 recommends that the default value of this parameter be in inverse proportion to the speed of the attached LAN.""
changed to
""Table 13-4 recommends defaults and ranges for Port Path Cost values, in inverse proportion to the speed of the attached LAN. If this object is used to set the Path Cost it is possible to restore the default setting using the ieee8021SpanningTreeRstpPortAdminPathCost object.""
A similar bit of description should be added for the ieee8021MstpPortPathCost object, since it is also read-write, since an admin object is added per Maintenance 108
3. (p725/line 25) The name ""ieee8021SpanningTreePortPathCost32"" should
be ""ieee8021SpanningTreePortPathCost""
Editor requested to update draft for 802.1Qrev | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
" "
| Technical Review by Ben Mack-Crane revised based on eidtor feedback, to be as follows:
1) (p727/line 8) The name ""ieee8021MstpCistPortPathCost"" used in the description for ieee8021MstpCistPortAdminPathCost does not exist. That is, there is no oper object to go with the admin object.
- Change
""This complements the object ieee8021MstpCistPortPathCost,
which returns the operational value of the path cost. ""
to
"" This complements the object ieee8021MstpCistPortCistPathCost,
which returns the operational value of the port path cost.""
- The ieee8021MstpCistPortCistPathCost object is intended to be the oper object for ieee8021MstpCistPortAdminPathCost, but its description is not consistent with this use.
Change the description of this object to
"" In an MSTP Bridge, the Port's Port Path Cost parameter value for the CIST.""
and change the references to
REFERENCE ""13.27.25, 17.13.11 of IEEE Std 802.1D""
- ieee8021MstpCistPathCost lacks references. Insert on page 720 line 50
REFERENCE ""13.9:d, 13.10""
- Table entry for ieee8021MstpCistPortAdminPathCost
page 507 line 7 change "" IEEE 802.1Da 13.22 p), 17.13.1"" to ""13.27.25, 17.13.11 of IEEE Std 802.1D ""
- Table entry for ieee8021MstpCistPortCistRegionalRootId
page 507 line 30 change ""13.10 c), 13.11, 13.27.47 "" to ""13.9 c), 13.11""
- Table entry for ieee8021MstpCistPortCistPathCost
page 507 line 31 change ""13.10 d), 13.11, 13.27.47 "" to ""13.27.25""
- Table entry for ieee8021MstpCistPathCost
page 506 line 17 change ""—"" to ""13.9 d), 13.11“
2) (p646/line 44) Since the object is read-write the description for ieee8021SpanningTreePortPathCost would benefit from the following change:
""802.1D-1998 recommends that the default value of this parameter be in inverse proportion to the speed of the attached LAN.""
changed to
""Table 13-4 recommends defaults and ranges for Port Path Cost values, in inverse proportion to the speed of the attached LAN. If this object is used to set the Path Cost it is possible to restore the default setting using the ieee8021SpanningTreeRstpPortAdminPathCost object.""
A similar bit of description should be added to the ieee8021MstpPortPathCost object,
“… Table 13-4 recommends defaults and ranges for Port Path Cost values, in inverse proportion to the speed of the attached LAN. If this object is used to set the Path Cost it is possible to restore the default setting using the ieee8021MstpPortAdminPathCost object”
3) (p725/line 25) The name ""ieee8021SpanningTreePortPathCost32"" should
be ""ieee8021SpanningTreePortPathCost""
Editor is requested to update draft for 802.1Qrev | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
"
| Included in D1.3, 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0110 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.7.6 - IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module - MSTID | 06-May-13 |
|
| Published | 6-May-13 |
| 17.7.6 - IEEE8021-MSTP MIB module - MSTID |
"
| Technical Review of this is required, particularly focused on the DESCRIPTION of the objects.
Nigel Bragg & Panos Saltsidis will lead this study
Target for 802.1Qrev, if needed
| 15-May-13 |
| |
" "
| Technical Review completed by Nigel Bragg -- agree with the replacement text proposed.
There are 4094 entries in the table, indexed by VLAN, and each returns an MSTID in the extended range of 0 – 4095.
Editor requested to include in next draft of 802.1Qrev
| 15-Jul-13 |
| |
"
| Included in D1.2, 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0111 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 12.16.3, 12.16.5 (and MIB) - IEEE8021-PBB-MIB - ingerss/egress bits | 06-May-13 |
|
| Published | 6-May-13 |
| 12.16.3, 12.16.5 (and MIB) - IEEE8021-PBB-MIB - ingerss/egress bits |
"
| The original intent was to cover assymmetric VLANs on BSIs, but this was never fully documented. Notably there are no state variables that would drive this. We either need to specify behaviour for this or deprecate them.
Agree to proposal. Modify text proposal slightly to “…multicast transmit…” Ballot review will determine if there is any interest to specify behaviour instead…
Editor to include in next draft of for 802.1Qrev | 15-May-13 |
| |
" "
| Agree to proposal as-is (without previous modification).
Editor has included in 802.1Qrev D1.2 that is balloting. Discuss further if needed after ballot review…
| 15-Jul-13 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0112 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 17.2.10 (and MIB) - IEEE8021-PBBTE MIB - ieee8021PbbTeTeSidTable | 06-May-13 |
|
| Published | 6-May-13 |
| 17.2.10 (and MIB) - IEEE8021-PBBTE MIB - ieee8021PbbTeTeSidTable |
"
| This is an editorial issue in the clause 17 text.
Agree to proposal.
Editor to include in next draft of for 802.1Qrev | 15-May-13 |
| |
" "
| This is an editorial issue in the clause 17 text.
Agree to proposal.
Editor to include in next draft of for 802.1Qrev | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
"
| Included in D1.2, 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in WG ballot recirc | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0115 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Balloting | 11.4.2.4 - correctionField (Integer64) | 10-Jul-13 |
|
| Balloting | 10-Jul-13 |
| 11.4.2.4 - correctionField (Integer64) |
"
| < Note: This was originally incorrectly numbered 0113 >
Proposal agreed.
Target for 802.1ASbt | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
"
| Included in draft D0.1 of 802.1ASbt | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| D0.2 of 802.1ASbt available, TG ballot after next meeting. | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| D0.3 of 802.1ASbt available, TG ballot after next meeting. | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| No update. | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| No update. | 14-May-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| Balloting in 802.1AS-Rev | 14-Jul-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0116 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Balloting | 11.4.2.4 - correctionField (Integer64) | 10-Jul-13 |
|
| Balloting | 10-Jul-13 |
| 11.4.2.4 - correctionField (Integer64) |
"
| < Note: This was originally incorrectly numbered 0114 >
Proposal agreed.
Target for 802.1ASbt | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
"
| Included in draft D0.1 of 802.1ASbt | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| D0.2 of 802.1ASbt available, TG ballot after next meeting. | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| D0.3 of 802.1ASbt available, TG ballot after next meeting. | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| No update. | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| No update. | 14-May-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| Balloting in 802.1AS-Rev | 14-Jul-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0117 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Balloting | B.2 - Time-aware system requirements | 10-Jul-13 |
|
| Balloting | 10-Jul-13 |
| B.2 - Time-aware system requirements |
"
| < Note: This was originally incorrectly numbered 0115 >
Proposal agreed.
Target for 802.1ASbt | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
" "
| Editor made a revised proposal and it was agreed.
Add respective references to B.2.2 and B.2.4, in clause 10; and B.2.3 in clause 11, add respective PICS entries for B.2.4
Make necessary changes for PICS entry for the Annex E reference to these sub clauses.
Editor instructed to include in the next draft of 802.1ASbt | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
"
| D0.2 of 802.1ASbt available with most changes, PICS changes will be made in D0.3. TG ballot after next meeting. | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| D0.3 of 802.1ASbt available, TG ballot after next meeting. | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| No update. | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| No update. | 14-May-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| Balloting in 802.1AS-Rev | 14-Jul-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0118 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Balloting | B.1.3.2 - Allan variance vertical axis units incorrect | 10-Jul-13 |
|
| Balloting | 10-Jul-13 |
| B.1.3.2 - Allan variance vertical axis units incorrect |
"
| < Note: This was originally incorrectly numbered 0116 >
Proposal agreed.
Target for 802.1ASbt | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
"
| Included in draft D0.1 of 802.1ASbt | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| D0.2 of 802.1ASbt available, TG ballot after next meeting. | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| D0.3 of 802.1ASbt available, TG ballot after next meeting. | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| No update. | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| No update. | 14-May-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| Balloting in 802.1AS-Rev | 14-Jul-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0119 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Balloting | 10.3.11.3 - BMCA - PortAnnounceInformation state machine - downgraded information | 10-Jul-13 |
|
| Balloting | 10-Jul-13 |
| 10.3.11.3 - BMCA - PortAnnounceInformation state machine - downgraded information |
"
| < Note: This was originally incorrectly numbered 0117 >
Technical review (including study of RSTP) assigned to Geoff Garner | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
"
| Technical review (including study of RSTP) assigned to Geoff Garner with assistance from Panos Saltsidis | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
"
| The current GM downgrades, the new information actually IS used immediately. In 10.3.5, it indicates that the message priority vector is superior to the portPriorityVector of the port if, and only if, the messagePriorityVector is better than the portPriorityVector, or the Announce message has been transmitted from the same master time-aware system and MasterPort as the portPriorityVector. The key is the 2nd part referring to the Announce message being transmitted from the same port.
Editor has made editorial change to ASbt D0.2 in 10.3.11.2.1 to remind the reader of this, and to point to 10.3.5.
| 12-Nov-13 |
| |
"
| D0.3 of 802.1ASbt available, TG ballot after next meeting. | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| No update. | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| No update. | 14-May-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| Balloting in 802.1AS-Rev | 14-Jul-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0120 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Balloting | 11.2.13.3 - Sync receipt timeout due to loss of single Follow_Up message | 10-Jul-13 |
|
| Balloting | 10-Jul-13 |
| 11.2.13.3 - Sync receipt timeout due to loss of single Follow_Up message |
"
| < Note: This was originally incorrectly numbered 0118 >
Proposal by Geoff Garner will be reviewed in TSN http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/docs2013/as-garner-sync-receipt-timeout-issue-0713-v01.pdf
Target for 802.1ASbt, if necessary | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
"
| Proposal agreed and included in draft D0.1 of 802.1ASbt | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
| D0.2 of 802.1ASbt available, TG ballot after next meeting. | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
| D0.3 of 802.1ASbt available, TG ballot after next meeting. | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| No update. | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| No update. | 14-May-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| D0.5 of 802.1ASbt available, no TG ballot | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| Balloting in 802.1AS-Rev | 14-Jul-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0121 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | 8.5.8, 11.2, 11.5.2 - System Capabilities TLV, Structure of the LLDP MIB, LLDP MIB module - version 2 | 10-Jul-13 |
|
| Published | 10-Jul-13 |
| 8.5.8, 11.2, 11.5.2 - System Capabilities TLV, Structure of the LLDP MIB, LLDP MIB module - version 2 |
"
| < Note: This was originally incorrectly numbered 0119 >
Issue 1 is already fixed per Maintenance #32
Technical review of issues 2 & 3 assigned to Norm Finn. Initial view:
The text of 9.2.5.7 makes it very clear that msgTxInterval is per-agent (per destination MAC address). However, the MIB variable lldpV2MessageTxInterval is per-system. There is clearly a problem that needs to be fixed. These points need investigation :
1. Is the list in 199 complete and accurate?
2. Should we fix the MIB to have more functionality?
3. Should we fix the state machine text to match the MIB but have less functionality? | 15-Jul-13 |
| |
" "
| Issue 1 is already fixed per Maintenance #32
issue 2: The text of 9.2.5.7 makes it very clear that msgTxInterval is per-agent (per destination MAC address). However, the MIB variable lldpV2MessageTxInterval is per-system. There is clearly a problem that needs to be fixed. Norm Finn will study further…
Issue 3: The text in the MIB certainly differs from the text in section 9.2.5.22. The MIB has no +1, 9.2.5.22 does. The corresponding text in 802.1AB-2005 doesn't have the +1. Clearly a conscious change was made in the 2009 text, but not to the MIB. As to which one is correct, I'd lean towards the +1. The difference is that, without the +1, the receiver times out at exactly the same time that the Nth frame is expected to arrive. The +1 makes much more sense. Fix MIB DESCRIPTION | 3-Sep-13 |
| |
" "
| Issue 1 is already fixed per Maintenance #32
Issue 2: The text of 9.2.5.7 makes it very clear that msgTxInterval (et al) is per-agent (per destination MAC address). However, the MIB variable lldpV2MessageTxInterval is per-system.
Solve by adding per-instance variables in parallel to the current variables. The current global variables now supply default values for new rows created in the per-instance variables.
Do not delete the current universal variables, but make it clear in the DESCRIPTIONS of the new variables added to lldpV2ManAddrConfigTxPortsEntry that the default value of these variables when a new row is created is the current value of the corresponding global variables that now exist. This goes in revised DESCRIPTION clauses of the current variables, also, of course.
Per Agent MIB objects should be maintained under lldpV2PortConfigTable. The new table would be as follows:
lldpV2PortConfigTable
lldpV2PortConfigIfIndex (Table index)
lldpV2PortConfigDestAddressIndex (Table index)
lldpV2PortConfigAdminStatus adminStatus, 9.2.5.1
lldpV2MessageTxInterval msgTxInterval, 9.2.5.7
lldpV2MessageTxHoldMultiplier msgTxHold, 9.2.5.6
lldpV2ReinitDelay reinitDelay, 9.2.5.10
lldpV2NotificationInterval msgTxInterval, 9.2.5.7
lldpV2TxCreditMax txCreditMax, 9.2.5.17
lldpV2MessageFastTx msgFastTx, 9.2.5.5
lldpV2TxFastInit txFastInit, 9.2.5.19
lldpV2PortConfigNotificationEnable —
lldpV2PortConfigTLVsTxEnable 9.1.2.1
Issue 3: The text in the MIB certainly differs from the text in section 9.2.5.22. The MIB has no +1, 9.2.5.22 does. The corresponding text in 802.1AB-2005 doesn't have the +1. Clearly a conscious change was made in the 2009 text, but not to the MIB. As to which one is correct, I'd lean towards the +1. The difference is that, without the +1, the receiver times out at exactly the same time that the Nth frame is expected to arrive. The +1 makes much more sense. Fix MIB DESCRIPTION to include
TTL = min(65535, (lldpV2MessageTxInterval * lldpV2MessageTxHoldMultiplier) + 1) | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
"
| Editor will prepare an initial draft of 802.1AB-Cor2 after PAR approval | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| Editor will prepare an initial draft of 802.1AB-Cor2 after PAR approval, for the May meeting | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| No update. | 14-May-14 |
| |
| Fixed in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Fixed in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Fixed in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Fixed in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1AB-2009/Cor2 was approved on Feb 16th, 2015. | 10-Mar-15 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| | 0-Jan-00 |
| |
| Change Request 0125 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Balloting | 6.6, 6.7 and 12 (802.1AC) - Internal Sublayer Service | 09-Sep-13 |
|
| Balloting | 9-Sep-13 |
| 6.6, 6.7 and 12 (802.1AC) - Internal Sublayer Service |
"
| Some items have been added back into 6.6 ISS and 6.7 of 802.1Q as a result of amendments and should be considered for move into 802.1AC:
6.6.1 Stream Reservation Protocol (SRP) Domain status parameters
6.6.2 Control primitives and parameters
6.6.3 EVB status parameters
6.7.1 Support of the Internal Sublayer Service by IEEE Std 802.3 (CSMA/CD)
But not all these are ISSS related, so they should not all be moved. Agree to instruct editors to make the follwoing changes:
Move 6.6.2 to clause 11 of .1AC (as part of .1AC-rev)
Move 6.7.1 to clause 12 of .1AC (as part of .1AC-rev)
Move 6.6.1 & 6.6.3 to more suitable places in .1Q (as part of .1Q-rev) | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-REV D1.4. 802.1Q-REV D2.0 is in sponsor ballot. 802.1AC-REV editor will include in the next draft (before the March meeting) | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc, 802.1AC is in WG ballot | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc, 802.1AC is in WG ballot Move 6.6.2 to clause 11 of .1AC (as part of .1AC-rev), retain in Q until AC done
Move 6.7.1 to clause 12 of .1AC (as part of .1AC-rev), retain in Q until AC done
Move 6.6.1 & 6.6.3 to more suitable places in .1Q (included in current.1Q-rev draft) (done)
| 14-May-14 |
| |
" "
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc, 802.1AC is in WG ballot. All changes implemented. New maintenance item 0141 tracks ultimate 802.1Q tidy-up.
| 17-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc, 802.1AC is in WG ballot. All changes implemented. New maintenance item 0141 tracks ultimate 802.1Q tidy-up.
| 17-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor ballot recirc, 802.1AC is in WG ballot. All changes implemented. New maintenance item 0141 tracks ultimate 802.1Q tidy-up.
| 17-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| 802.1Q-REV is published, 802.1AC is in WG ballot. All changes implemented. New maintenance item 0141 tracks ultimate 802.1Q tidy-up.
| 17-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| 802.1Q-REV is published, 802.1AC is in WG ballot. All changes implemented. New maintenance item 0141 tracks ultimate 802.1Q tidy-up.
| 17-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| 802.1Q-REV is published, 802.1AC is in WG ballot. All changes implemented. New maintenance item 0141 tracks ultimate 802.1Q tidy-up.
| 17-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| 802.1Q-REV is published, 802.1AC is in WG ballot. All changes implemented. New maintenance item 0141 tracks ultimate 802.1Q tidy-up.
| 17-Jul-14 |
| |
"
| Change Request 0126 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Appendix C.6 - dot3adAggPortActorOperKey | 03-Oct-13 |
|
| Published | 3-Oct-13 |
| Appendix C.6 - dot3adAggPortActorOperKey |
"
| Agreed it is read-only. Editor will include as rogue comment in 802.1AX-rev WG ballot and update draft for recirc ballot.
| 12-Nov-13 |
| |
" "
| Included in D3.1 -- .1AXrev in WG ballot
| 22-Jan-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev going to sponsor ballot
| 18-Mar-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 14-May-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| .1AXrev is in sponsor ballot
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
"
| Approved and published. | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| Approved and published. | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| Approved and published. | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| Approved and published. | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| Change Request 0127 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Section 9.2.7.12, 9.2.8, 9.2.10 - txInitializeLLDP, Transmit State Machine, Transmit timer state machine | 04-Oct-13 |
|
| Published | 4-Oct-13 |
| Section 9.2.7.12, 9.2.8, 9.2.10 - txInitializeLLDP, Transmit State Machine, Transmit timer state machine |
"
| The problem is that
(adminStatus == disabled) ||
(adminStatus == enabledRxOnly)
sends the Transmit state machine to TX_SHUTDOWN_FRAME which starts a timer and sends the Transmit timer state machine to TX_TIMER_INITIALIZE which resets that same timer – undoing the setting of it.
Agreed solution:
remove the initialization of that timer (txShutdownWhile=0) from TX_TIMER_INITIALIZE of Fig 9-3 (Transmit timer state machine) and move it to TX_LLDP_INITIALIZE of Fig 9-1.
This is a critical state machine issue and it was agreed to initiate a new corrigenda to cover items 121 & 127. | 12-Nov-13 |
| |
"
| Editor will prepare an initial draft of 802.1AB-Cor2 after PAR approval | 22-Jan-14 |
| |
| Editor will prepare an initial draft of 802.1AB-Cor2 after PAR approval, for the May meeting | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
| No update. | 14-May-14 |
| |
"
| Fixed in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2.
Entering sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| Fixed in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2.
Entering sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| Fixed in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2.
Entering sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| Fixed in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2.
Entering sponsor ballot | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
"
| 802.1AB-2009/Cor2 was approved on Feb 16th, 2015. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1AB-2009/Cor2 was approved on Feb 16th, 2015. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1AB-2009/Cor2 was approved on Feb 16th, 2015. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Change Request 0128 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | Annex O - Bibliography | 1-Mar-14 |
|
| Published | 1-Mar-14 |
| Annex O - Bibliography |
"
| Agreed.
Similar comment received on 802.1Qrev sponsor ballot, change will be implemented in the next draft.
Target for 802.1AB Cor2 | 18-Mar-14 |
| |
"
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor recirc. | 14-May-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor recirc. | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-REV is in sponsor recirc. | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is approved. | 15-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is published. | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is published. | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is published. | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| 802.1Q-2014 is published. | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0132 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Balloting | D.2.7.1 - aggregation status | 18-Mar-14 |
|
| Balloting | 18-Mar-14 |
| D.2.7.1 - aggregation status |
"
| Agreed
Editor requested to implement in 802.1Qrev
| 18-Mar-14 |
| |
" "
| No update
Editor requested to implement in 802.1Qrev
| 14-May-14 |
| |
" "
| No update
This has not been fixed in 802.1Qrev
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| No update
This has not been fixed in 802.1Qrev
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| No update
This has not been fixed in 802.1Qrev
| 15-Jul-14 |
| |
"
| Included in 802.1Q-2014/Cor1 | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| Included in 802.1Q-2014/Cor1 | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| Included in 802.1Q-2014/Cor1 | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| Balloting in 802.1Q-2014/Cor1 | 14-Jul-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0133 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Published | E.8.1 - aggregation status | 18-Mar-14 |
|
| Published | 18-Mar-14 |
| E.8.1 - aggregation status |
"
| Agreed
Editor requested to implement in 802.1AB Cor2 draft
| 18-Mar-14 |
| |
"
| Clause E was already removed in 802.1AB/Cor-1. Need to check for references to Clause E in rest of 802.1AB. | 14-May-14 |
| |
| Clause E was already removed in 802.1AB/Cor-1. Tidyup implemented in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Clause E was already removed in 802.1AB/Cor-1. Tidyup implemented in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Clause E was already removed in 802.1AB/Cor-1. Tidyup implemented in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Clause E was already removed in 802.1AB/Cor-1. Tidyup implemented in 802.1AB-Cor2/D0.2. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1AB-2009/Cor2 was approved on Feb 16th, 2015. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1AB-2009/Cor2 was approved on Feb 16th, 2015. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| 802.1AB-2009/Cor2 was approved on Feb 16th, 2015. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Change Request 0137 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Balloting | 32, 33 - Polarity of cnmQOffset | 12-May-14 |
|
| Balloting | 12-May-14 |
| 32, 33 - Polarity of cnmQOffset |
| Request evaluation by DCB TG | 14-May-14 |
| |
| Solution developed by TG. Need to initiate 802.1Q-2014/Cor-1 to implement fix. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Solution developed by TG. Need to initiate 802.1Q-2014/Cor-1 to implement fix. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Solution developed by TG. Need to initiate 802.1Q-2014/Cor-1 to implement fix. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Included in 802.1Q-2014/Cor1 | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| Included in 802.1Q-2014/Cor1 | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| Included in 802.1Q-2014/Cor1 | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| Balloting in 802.1Q-2014/Cor1 | 14-Jul-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0138 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Balloting | 10.2.11, Figure 10-8 - Sync messages can be sent too often | 13-May-14 |
|
| Balloting | 13-May-14 |
| 10.2.11, Figure 10-8 - Sync messages can be sent too often |
"
| Issue agreed
Solution under study in TSN TG | 14-May-14 |
| |
" "
| Issue agreed
Solution documented in Annex Z of 802.1ASbt | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| Issue agreed
Solution documented in Annex Z of 802.1ASbt | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
" "
| Issue agreed
Solution documented in Annex Z of 802.1ASbt | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
"
| Ready for ballot in 802.1AS-Rev | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| Ready for ballot in 802.1AS-Rev | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| Ready for ballot in 802.1AS-Rev | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| Balloting in 802.1AS-Rev | 14-Jul-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0141 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
Complete
then Ballot | 6.6.1, 6.7.1 - Remove 6.6.1 and 6.7.1 | 17-Jul-14 |
|
| Complete
then Ballot | 17-Jul-14 |
| 6.6.1, 6.7.1 - Remove 6.6.1 and 6.7.1 |
| Received | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Proposed to fix this in next 802.1Q maintenance document. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Proposed to fix this in next 802.1Q maintenance document. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Proposed to fix this in next 802.1Q maintenance document. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Proposed to fix this in next 802.1Q maintenance document. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Proposed to fix this in next 802.1Q maintenance document. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Proposed to fix this in next 802.1Q maintenance document. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Change Request 0146 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
Complete
then Ballot | C.6 - Reintroduced errors in IEEE8023-LAG-MIB | 02-Nov-14 |
|
| Complete
then Ballot | 2-Nov-14 |
| C.6 - Reintroduced errors in IEEE8023-LAG-MIB |
| Received | 4-Nov-14 |
| |
| Existence of a problem is agreed. Change is not allowed per SMI rules. Object must be deprecated, but given the OID issue, the entire MIB must be deprecated and re-rooted. Solution needs to be developed. | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| Existence of a problem is agreed. Change is not allowed per SMI rules. Object must be deprecated, but given the OID issue, the entire MIB must be deprecated and re-rooted. Solution needs to be developed. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Existence of a problem is agreed. Change is not allowed per SMI rules. Object must be deprecated, but given the OID issue, the entire MIB must be deprecated and re-rooted. Solution needs to be developed. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Existence of a problem is agreed. Change is not allowed per SMI rules. Object must be deprecated, but given the OID issue, the entire MIB must be deprecated and re-rooted. Solution needs to be developed. | 17-Jul-14 |
| |
| Change Request 0153 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
Complete
then Ballot | F.6.5 - PortAutoNegAdvertisedCap objects are the wrong size | 07-Jan-15 |
|
| Complete
then Ballot | 7-Jan-15 |
| F.6.5 - PortAutoNegAdvertisedCap objects are the wrong size |
| John to email Howard Frazier (copy Glenn) to confirm issues. Need to deprecate MIB objects and add new ones with correct syntax. Need to decide .1AB/Cor2 vs .1AB-REV | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
| John emailed Howard Frazier (copy Glenn) to confirm issues (no response). Need to deprecate MIB objects and add new ones with correct syntax. Need to decide .1AB/Cor2 vs .1AB-REV | 7-Mar-15 |
| |
| John emailed Howard Frazier (copy Glenn) to confirm issues (no response). Need to deprecate MIB objects and add new ones with correct syntax. Need to decide .1AB/Cor2 vs .1AB-REV | 7-Mar-15 |
| |
| Agreed as an issue. Need to deprecate and introduce new objects. | 14-Jul-15 |
| |
| Change Request 0154 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
Complete
then Ballot | 13.5 - MIB ieee8021XPaePortAuthenticatorEnable and ieee8021XPaePortSupplicantEnable | 07-Jan-15 |
|
| Complete
then Ballot | 7-Jan-15 |
| 13.5 - MIB ieee8021XPaePortAuthenticatorEnable and ieee8021XPaePortSupplicantEnable |
| Referred to 802.1 Security TG | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
"
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
Document the fact that these are in fact status variables, reflecting ""enabled"", and are thus properly read-only.
| 7-Mar-15 |
| |
" "
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
Document the fact that these are in fact status variables, reflecting ""enabled"", and are thus properly read-only.
| 7-Mar-15 |
| |
" "
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
Document the fact that these are in fact status variables, reflecting ""enabled"", and are thus properly read-only.
| 7-Mar-15 |
| |
"
| Change Request 0155 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
Complete
then Ballot | 13.5 - MIB ieee8021XAuthPaeReAuthEnabled | 07-Jan-15 |
|
| Complete
then Ballot | 7-Jan-15 |
| 13.5 - MIB ieee8021XAuthPaeReAuthEnabled |
| Referred to 802.1 Security TG | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
"
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
The MIB references clause 8.9 and figure 12-3 for this variable. There is nothing is 8.9 that suggests the variable should always read as false. The variable is missing from figure 12-3, which seems to be a simple oversight.
PROPOSED ACTION:
Add reAuthEnabled as a boolean read/write to Authenticator in Figure 12-3. Since this variable is already defined as used by management in 8.9 and is in the MIB this is an editorial/corrigenda type of change. For the same reasons the change is not urgent.
Clarify/correct the object DESCRIPTION in the MIB. Since this is just a clarification of the description it need not result in the deprecation of the object/creation of a new object.
T.b.d. the vehicle for such a change. Possible inclusion in a future project to add a Yang module. | 7-Mar-15 |
| |
" "
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
The MIB references clause 8.9 and figure 12-3 for this variable. There is nothing is 8.9 that suggests the variable should always read as false. The variable is missing from figure 12-3, which seems to be a simple oversight.
PROPOSED ACTION:
Add reAuthEnabled as a boolean read/write to Authenticator in Figure 12-3. Since this variable is already defined as used by management in 8.9 and is in the MIB this is an editorial/corrigenda type of change. For the same reasons the change is not urgent.
Clarify/correct the object DESCRIPTION in the MIB. Since this is just a clarification of the description it need not result in the deprecation of the object/creation of a new object.
T.b.d. the vehicle for such a change. Possible inclusion in a future project to add a Yang module. | 7-Mar-15 |
| |
" "
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
The MIB references clause 8.9 and figure 12-3 for this variable. There is nothing is 8.9 that suggests the variable should always read as false. The variable is missing from figure 12-3, which seems to be a simple oversight.
PROPOSED ACTION:
Add reAuthEnabled as a boolean read/write to Authenticator in Figure 12-3. Since this variable is already defined as used by management in 8.9 and is in the MIB this is an editorial/corrigenda type of change. For the same reasons the change is not urgent.
Clarify/correct the object DESCRIPTION in the MIB. Since this is just a clarification of the description it need not result in the deprecation of the object/creation of a new object.
T.b.d. the vehicle for such a change. Possible inclusion in a future project to add a Yang module. | 7-Mar-15 |
| |
"
| Change Request 0156 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
| Rejected | 13.5 - MIB ieee8021XAuthenticatorTable | 07-Jan-15 |
|
| Rejected | 7-Jan-15 |
| 13.5 - MIB ieee8021XAuthenticatorTable |
| Referred to 802.1 Security TG | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
"
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
The existing description of the table describes its persistence. See discussion of maintenance request #154 above for a discussion of what ieee8021XPaePortAuthenticatorEnable means. In particular it does not mean that useEAP is set to a value other than 'Never', it simply means that the implemented capability is available for use, not that the Logon Process has decided to set authenticate to take the PACP state machine (figure 8-6 or figure 8-7) out of UNAUTHENTICATED state.
| 7-Mar-15 |
| |
" "
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
The existing description of the table describes its persistence. See discussion of maintenance request #154 above for a discussion of what ieee8021XPaePortAuthenticatorEnable means. In particular it does not mean that useEAP is set to a value other than 'Never', it simply means that the implemented capability is available for use, not that the Logon Process has decided to set authenticate to take the PACP state machine (figure 8-6 or figure 8-7) out of UNAUTHENTICATED state.
| 7-Mar-15 |
| |
" "
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
The existing description of the table describes its persistence. See discussion of maintenance request #154 above for a discussion of what ieee8021XPaePortAuthenticatorEnable means. In particular it does not mean that useEAP is set to a value other than 'Never', it simply means that the implemented capability is available for use, not that the Logon Process has decided to set authenticate to take the PACP state machine (figure 8-6 or figure 8-7) out of UNAUTHENTICATED state.
| 7-Mar-15 |
| |
"
| Change Request 0157 Revision History |
| Status | Description | Date Received |
Complete
then Ballot | 13.5 - MIB ieee8021XEapolStartFramesTx | 07-Jan-15 |
|
| Complete
then Ballot | 7-Jan-15 |
| 13.5 - MIB ieee8021XEapolStartFramesTx |
| Referred to 802.1 Security TG | 13-Jan-15 |
| |
"
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
Clarify/correct the object DESCRIPTION in the MIB as suggested. Since
this is just a clarification of the description it need not result in
the deprecation of the object/creation of a new object.
| 7-Mar-15 |
| |
" "
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
Clarify/correct the object DESCRIPTION in the MIB as suggested. Since
this is just a clarification of the description it need not result in
the deprecation of the object/creation of a new object.
| 7-Mar-15 |
| |
" "
| Status in http://www.ieee802.org/1/private/email2/msg22740.html
Clarify/correct the object DESCRIPTION in the MIB as suggested. Since
this is just a clarification of the description it need not result in
the deprecation of the object/creation of a new object.
| 7-Mar-15 |
| |
"
![[Search]](http://grouper.ieee.org/img/search.gif)
![[e-mail]](http://grouper.ieee.org/img/email.gif){kind=small}
![[Standards Home Page]](http://grouper.ieee.org/img/home.gif)
![[Corporate Home Page]](http://grouper.ieee.org/img/corp.gif)