Subject: RE: [VRRP] MIB work

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 19:00:40 -0700

Hi Bret, 
	Thanks for the pointer. Browsing through the ID, it looks like they 
	are proposing two different MIBs too. I contacted the authors about
	their input on the pending one MIB vs two MIBs issue. 
	
Thanks
kalyan

-----Original Message-----
From: ext Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: 01 September, 2003 06:53
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [VRRP] MIB work

Pls take a look (and comment if needed) on
  draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-ops-02.txt

A few snippets

  ... snip ..

  5.099 RFC 2787 Definitions of Managed Objects for the Virtual
        Router Redundancy Protocol

    As stated in the Overview section:

    Since the VRRP protocol is intended for use with IPv4 routers only,
    this MIB uses the SYNTAX for IP addresses which is specific to IPv4.
    Thus, changes will be required for this MIB to interoperate in an
    IPv6 environment.

  ... snip ...

  7.3.27  VRRP MIB (RFC 2787)

  The problems have not been addressed and a new MIB should be defined.

  .. snip ..

I have told them that you are working on it, but you may want to keep
an eye on the survey doc as well.

Thanks,
Bert 

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

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