Subject: Re: Updated ITU Alarm IANA Textual Convention

From: "David T. Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 09:37:44 -0700

HI,

Can someone provide data to make me feel comfortable about using ITU
instead of Telcordia models? In the customers interactions where I've
participated, ITU is not an issue. Telcordia and their applications
are.

Regards,
/david t. perkins

---

From: Tammy Ferris <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 18:23:06 -0500

David,

I am not sure what your issue really is.  Remember that the ITU models
are based, in part, on Telcordia data definitions.

Telcordia is not a standards body. While Telcordia builds management
applications and vendors may be required to pass OSMINE to conform to
interfaces available on these applications, I am failing to see how this
is a problem for developing an SNMP alarm mib.

Are you saying that Telcordia is supporting an SNMP based Alarm MIB that
must be considered?

Are you saying there are some historically expected functionality that is
need that is not adequately addressed in the ITU models?

I would oppose the idea of considering Telcordia a standards organization
with which we should work with for conformance.

If, however, there is alarm management functionality that you think is
not clear in the ITU models or incomplete and can become more complete
and cover historically needed functions or more clear in the SNMP model
then I support your effort.  This is why I support the notions behind the
condition MIB and would like to have a condition profile.

Tammy

---

From: "Dave Sidor" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2001 01:54:22 -0400

David,

Sorry I could not reply earlier as I was on my way to my vacation venue.
I am not a spokesman for Telcordia; they obviously can do that much
better than I. However, as chair of SG 4 I offer the following, some of
which are obvious but worth noting:

- the ITU alarm semantics represent an international telecom agreement
and thus are applicable globally

- full responsibility for the X.700 series standards, including X.733,
was passed by ISO to SG 4 several years

- M.3100 is the responsibility of SG 4 and its probable causes represent
the values preferred by international telecom community [incidentally
the orginal editor of M.3100 was a representative from Bellcore, now
Telcordia]

Note to all: In response to Bert Wijnen's request for SG 4 participation
in this debate, I asked that any discussion on the ITU alarm mib be also
sent to the Q 10/4 mailing list. I have just sent all emails I have
received since Friday to that list and copied this one as well, but
unfortunately cannot continue this forever.

Dave Sidor