The SatLabs Group DVB-RCS MIB
draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-08

[Ballot comment]
1. In the Abstract section

s/It defines a set of MIB entities / It defines a set of MIB objects /

2. It would be nice to mention the contribution of MIB Doctor Bert Wijnen in the Acknowledgments section.

[Ballot discuss]
I may remove this discuss at the telechat. Somehow, it seems odd to use the RFC series to document a proprietary MIB. Do we have any precedent for doing this?

IANA questions/comments:

- QUESTION: the document lists transmission number 239 as
"dvbRcsMib," but the registry lists it as "dvbRcsMacLayer."
Should the document be updated, or the registry?

Upon approval, all eferences to [Combes] at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers will be replaced with
references to this document.

Dear Gorry and Mark,


indeed we overlooked some of the recommendations in this Annex C. Many thanks to the MIB Doctors for spotting this.
This is easy to fix (prefix dvbRcs to all descriptors). I will also go through RFC4181 more carefully and provide amendments where necessary. We'll do that in the next few days so that the review can proceed with a cleanup version.

kind regards,


Stephane

Telecommunications Department (TIA-TP)
ESA/ESTEC
Keplerlaan.1,P.O.Box 299, 2201 AZ Noordwijk ZH
Tel:+31 (0)71 56 58 674
Fax:+31 (0)71 56 54 598


Gorry Fairhurst

07/02/2009 13:43
Please respond to
gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk


To
Mark Townsley
cc
draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs@tools.ietf.org, ipdvb-chairs@tools.ietf.org
Subject
Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] Call for a volunteer to reviewhttp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt






Stephane, et al,

Do you understand clearly what is being asked for?

Would you be able to make these changes, and do you think that you will
need any help?

Best wishes,

Gorry

Mark Townsley wrote:
>
> Charis, Authors,
>
> May we have a new version that addresses this naming convention issue so
> that we can continue?
>
> It looks like the document has been sitting for a few months due to this
> hangup, apologies for not forwarding this issue on to you immediately
> (store and forward through an overloaded AD is not the best manner of
> getting a message from one person to another, but that's another issue -
> it was my ultimate responsibility and for that I apologize).
>
> - Mark
>
> Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
>> */Mark,/*
>> *//* */Can we have this issue fixed? /*
>> *//* */The recommended naming conventions for MIB objects and modules
>> are described in Appendix C of RFC 4181. In general, RFC 4181 should
>> be mandatory reading for everybody writing and reviewing MIB
>> documents. /*
>> *//* */Dan/*
>> 
>>
>>   
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>    *From:* Bert Wijnen (IETF) [mailto:bertietf@bwijnen.net]
>>    *Sent:* Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:09 PM
>>    *To:* Romascanu, Dan (Dan); MIB Doctors (E-mail)
>>    *Cc:* Mark Townsley
>>    *Subject:* Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] Call for a volunteer to
>>   
>> reviewhttp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt
>>
>>
>>    Only having taken a very very cursory browse of this doc, I DO
>>    have one
>>    SERIOUS concern. And that is that all the object names
>>    (descriptors) do
>>    not follow ANY naming convention.
>>          I would URGE them to prefix all their descriptors with a
>> common prefix
>>    that will help avoid naming conflicts in the future.
>>          I am not sure if/when I will have time to do a close review.
>>    But I would recommend that they do that proper naming FIRST before
>>    anyone
>>    spends too much time on this
>>          Bert
>>
>>        ----- Original Message -----
>>        *From:* Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
>>        *To:* MIB Doctors (E-mail)
>>        *Cc:* Mark Townsley
>>        *Sent:* Sunday, November 16, 2008 11:47 PM
>>        *Subject:* [MIB-DOCTORS] Call for a volunteer to
>>       
>> reviewhttp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt
>>
>>
>>        MIB Doctors,
>>
>>        We need a volunteer to perform a MIB Doctor review on the I-D
>>       
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt
>>        .
>>        This is an AD-sponsored contribution targeting Informational RFC,
>>        sponsored by Mark Townsley.
>>
>>        Thanks and Regards,
>>
>>        Dan
>>        _______________________________________________
>>        MIB-DOCTORS mailing list
>>        MIB-DOCTORS@ietf.org
>>        https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors
>>
>
>

Sent email to authors asking for compliance with naming convention.



-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] Call for a volunteer to reviewhttp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 00:42:09 +0100
From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
To: Bert Wijnen (IETF) , MIB Doctors (E-mail)
CC: Mark Townsley
References:


Mark,

Can we have this issue fixed?

The recommended naming conventions for MIB objects and modules are described in Appendix C of RFC 4181. In general, RFC 4181 should be mandatory reading for everybody writing and reviewing MIB documents.

Dan


    From: Bert Wijnen (IETF) [mailto:bertietf@bwijnen.net]
    Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2008 7:09 PM
    To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); MIB Doctors (E-mail)
    Cc: Mark Townsley
    Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] Call for a volunteer to reviewhttp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt

    Only having taken a very very cursory browse of this doc, I DO have one
    SERIOUS concern. And that is that all the object names (descriptors) do
    not follow ANY naming convention.
   
    I would URGE them to prefix all their descriptors with a common prefix
    that will help avoid naming conflicts in the future.
   
    I am not sure if/when I will have time to do a close review.
    But I would recommend that they do that proper naming FIRST before anyone
    spends too much time on this
   
    Bert

        ----- Original Message -----
        From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
        To: MIB Doctors (E-mail)
        Cc: Mark Townsley
        Sent: Sunday, November 16, 2008 11:47 PM
        Subject: [MIB-DOCTORS] Call for a volunteer to reviewhttp://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt

        MIB Doctors,

        We need a volunteer to perform a MIB Doctor review on the I-D
        http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt .
        This is an AD-sponsored contribution targeting Informational RFC,
        sponsored by Mark Townsley.

        Thanks and Regards,

        Dan
        _______________________________________________
        MIB-DOCTORS mailing list
        MIB-DOCTORS@ietf.org
        https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors

Publication Request:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Request to AD to publish: draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt
Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 15:10:50 +0100
From: Gorry Fairhurst
Reply-To: gorry@erg.abdn.ac.uk
Organization: The University of Aberdeen is a charity registered in Scotland, No SC013683.
To: Mark Townsley
CC: Stephane.Combes@esa.int, gorry Fairhurst , Martin Stiemerling


Mark,

As Internet AD, we'd like to forward you the following draft with a
request for publication from the authors:

http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-combes-ipdvb-mib-rcs-04.txt

Revisions of this draft were posted to the ipdvb WG, where Martin and I
(among others) have provided feedback on readability, and the contents
of the MIB. Martin and I feel that the latest revision answers our
concerns (specifically the inconsistencies are resolved, and comments
answered, and there is now a section 3 that satisfies the need for a
human readable description of the MIB module).

The authors assure us that the document is now complete, and that the
SatLabs organisation have approved this version of the specification.
The primary point of contact is Stephane Combes (in cc).

In summary, we think this is now ready to proceed as an AD-sponsored
individual draft submission (presumably for INFO). Please can you take
this forward now?

Gorry & Martin
(IETF ipdvb WG)