FW: [802.1 - 7026] Your votes on 802.3bd
Hi Pat,
I am sorry that I cannot attend the interim meeting. As things stand now
I may attend the next plenary though.
Concerning the comments resolution. I still have concern with the
following:
The managed object definitions in 802.3 Clause 30 generally do not
include default values or persistency at power loss. This would be added
when the
managed object is added to the 802.3 MIB in 802.3.1.
I know that this has been the traditional approach for Clause 30 in IEEE
802.3 but I believe it's flawed. Clause 30 is supposed to provide a
protocol-independent informational model, and the issues default value
at agent initialization and of persistency of management objects at
reboot are not a protocol-specific issue. Adding those only at the phase
were the SMIv2 MIB is defined risks for the issue to be missed if
another data modeling language than SMIv2 is used in the future for
management purpose - hence my comment that the current definitions do
not allow for a unique interpretation and interoperable implementations.
Dan
________________________________
From: Pat Thaler [mailto:pthaler@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 7:56 AM
To: Norman Finn (nfinn); Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Eric Gray;
shaddock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Multanen, Eric W; Shimon.Muller@xxxxxxx;
'Ganga, Ilango S'; Marek Hajduczenia
Subject: Your votes on 802.3bd
Dear Colleagues,
All of you submitted Disapprove votes on 802.3bd. Proposed
comment resolutions have been posted at:
http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/private/bd-drafts/d0/802.3bd-d0-3-pdis-v3
.pdf
Please take a look at them and let me know if your comments have
been satisfied or if you still have concerns.
Regards,
Pat
===
Unsubscribe link: mailto:STDS-802-1-L-SIGNOFF-REQUEST@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
IEEE. Fostering technological innovation and excellence for the benefit
of humanity.