Subject: RE: [rohc] Questions about the MIB!

From: "Lars-Erik Jonsson (EPL)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 15:49:53 +0100

> -----Original Message-----
> From: West, Mark (ITN) [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: den 25 februari 2002 11:03
> To: [email-masked]
> Cc: Juergen Quittek
> Subject: [rohc] Questions about the MIB!
> 
> 
> There is a quantity of 
> information about contexts which is based on the profiles defined in 
> RFC-3095.  (For example, referring to the modes as U, O and R 
> and states 
> as IR/FO/SO).  This makes absolute sense with regard to RFC 
> 3095.  I am 
> interested to know what anyone thinks about the impact of splitting 
> 3095, however!  How much of the MIB can/should be based on specific 
> profile details, rather than 'generic' framework?  (Clearly 
> in the cases 
> mentioned above, opaque numeric identifiers could be used)
> Anyway, it's a general issue that it would be nice to have 
> some input on...

I agree that this must be considered, and the details will of course 
be clearer when we start the Framework/Profile split. However, most
things can clearly be identified as Framework or RTP, and the MIB
should probably separate what is general ROHC Framework properties
from what is RTP specific details.

/L-E 

_______________________________________________
Rohc mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc