[Syslog] Mib -10-, part 2

"David Harrington" <ietfdbh@comcast.net> Thu, 26 October 2006 23:49 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GdEyv-0006zt-Dq; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:49:53 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GdEyu-0006ze-52 for syslog@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:49:52 -0400
Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net ([63.240.77.82]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GdEys-0001ZH-U9 for syslog@ietf.org; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 19:49:52 -0400
Received: from harrington73653 (unknown[83.71.141.73]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id <2006102623494901200ms1pje>; Thu, 26 Oct 2006 23:49:50 +0000
From: David Harrington <ietfdbh@comcast.net>
To: syslog@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 00:47:13 +0100
Message-ID: <065001c6f959$168c5920$22021eac@china.huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2962
Thread-Index: Acb5J7WaudOgruI+SlyGPAAB5qM/pw==
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7aafa0432175920a4b3e118e16c5cb64
Cc:
Subject: [Syslog] Mib -10-, part 2
X-BeenThere: syslog@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Issues in Network Event Logging <syslog.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog>, <mailto:syslog-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/syslog>
List-Post: <mailto:syslog@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:syslog-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog>, <mailto:syslog-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: syslog-bounces@lists.ietf.org

Hi Glenn,

I want to remind you of some outstanding issues to resolve:

>From tom petch, 8-16:
"I still have trouble with the mib document, not for any mibby reason
but simply
because, as I commented on the previous version, it seems to be
written in a
different language to the other I-D and, insofar as I understand that
language,
seems to be describing a different set of concepts to the other
documents."

And 9-28:
"I have looked at this I-D and appreciate the increased explanation at
the
beginning.  It leaves me clearer, but still thinking that this
document steers a
different course to the other syslog ones, in its focus on a group of
syslog
entities.  It's not that there cannot be more than one syslog entity
running in
a given host, just that bundling them together into a table seems an
artificial
complication; other syslog MIB modules I see are scalar in approach."

I am less concerned about the table of entities versus modeling a
single entity. Having this in a table makes it easier than forcing the
use of contexts to get at multiple instances of the MIB module on a
host, and is consistent with the hrSwRunTable of the Host Resources
MIB. Unless the WG raises objections, I believe the table approach is
acceptable.

Consistent concepts and terminology is important. WG consensus is that
all the documents should be consistent. The other document editors
aligned their terminology, and you must do so for this document as
well. It is especially important that terminology used in the
management interface be consistent with the technology being managed.

Please plan on submitting another official revision before Nov 12,
with all outstanding change requests addressed, so we can finish
another 2-week WGLC and still meet our November deadline. If you
question some of the change requests, please consult the chairs and we
will make a determination.

Thanks,

David Harrington
dharrington@huawei.com 
dbharrington@comcast.net
ietfdbh@comcast.net



_______________________________________________
Syslog mailing list
Syslog@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog