Subject: Re: IPv6 MIBs - internet draft status

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2002 13:19:34 +0200

Hi Margaret and Bill,

On 05/30/02, Margaret Wasserman <[email-masked]> wrote :
> The IPv6 MIB Design Team has been meeting regularly, and
> we are planning to provide updates to all four of the
> drafts you have mentioned by the Yokohama draft cut-off.

In draft-ietf-ipngwg-rfc2011-update-00.txt, ipv6InterfaceAdminStatus
and ipv6InterfaceOperStatus are questionned for their usefullness.

Independently controlling the adminstatus of IPv4 and
IPv6 interface on a given L2 interface looks reasonable
to me. Keeping IPv4 and IPv6 interface adminstatus in MIB
would allow this.

Further, isn't the efficiency reason not strong enough to
keep the notion of operational state of IPv6 interface ?

Thanks,
Kind regards,
Robert

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------