From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Aug 1 01:23:12 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26980 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 01:23:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19iSNI-0006KS-FW for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 01:22:44 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h715Mict024324 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 01:22:44 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19iSMb-0006Jq-KC; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 01:22:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19iSMB-0006JT-LG for bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 01:21:35 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26974 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 01:21:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19iSM8-0002So-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 01:21:32 -0400 Received: from shell4.bayarea.net ([209.128.82.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19iSM7-0002Sl-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 01:21:31 -0400 Received: from localhost (heard@localhost) by shell4.bayarea.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h715LVO17906 for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 22:21:31 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: shell4.bayarea.net: heard owned process doing -bs Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 22:21:30 -0700 (PDT) From: "C. M. Heard" X-Sender: heard@shell4.bayarea.net To: bridge-mib@ietf.org Subject: RE: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt (fwd) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="-2133786286-408399451-1059715139=:11354" Content-ID: Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. Send mail to mime@docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info. ---2133786286-408399451-1059715139=:11354 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-ID: [ The attached message was apparently trapped by the spam filters. -- cmh ] ---2133786286-408399451-1059715139=:11354 Content-Type: MESSAGE/RFC822; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-ID: Content-Description: RE: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt (fwd) From: "Jim Burns" To: "Les Bell" , "C. M. Heard" Cc: , Subject: RE: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:48:30 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <80256D74.002CA874.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi folks, At the July Plenary we have decided to put the 802.1aa mib back to its original 802.1X state (or as close to it as we can achieve). Those values which are EAP or AAA related (counts of 'request ids' and 'response ids', etc) will have their text changed to indicate that these values will be filled by a functional entity other than the 802.1X PAE(the EAP entity for instance). The reason for this issue is that .1aa clearly dilineates labor between the 802.1X PAE and EAP and AAA. The guiding principle in .1aa is that it is to transport EAP and switch between controlled/uncontrolled port, not interpret EAP, this means it should not look at the EAP header, only the EAPOL header. With this principle, the PAE is unable to keep some MIB statistics and those need to be handled by the appropriate entities (although in actual implementations it is very likely that one piece of software is handling PAE and EAP on the authenticator, the standards are separate). Our options were to: 1. Alter the existing MIB to get the closest values to the current ones while only looking at the EAPOL header. 2. Remove all EAP related values and let the EAP group define their own MIB. 3. Leave the MIB alone and let the text indicate that some values need to be filled by entities other than the PAE. We chose #3 because we don't want to change the MIB for fear that the AP and Bridge manufacturers may not update their MIBs to the new one in a timely fashion and then management software will need to deal with these different MIBs leading to potential interoperability issues. The feeling is that it took a long time for the industry to get the current MIB implemented properly on their equipment, this MIB is extremely important to troubleshooting and we don't want to add yet another potential complexity to wireless access. So, the MIB remains the same, the definition for the values remain the same, but which functional entity is expected to fill some of the values is made more clear. The changes to bring the .1aa MIB back toward the original .1X MIB should be done soon. If you would like to review the changes please let me know and we can send them out to you as soon as we get them done. These will be 'beta' changes as they will still need to go through the IEEE balloting process, but it would allow you to track it and give input. Thanks, Jim B. -----Original Message----- From: owner-stds-802-1@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-1@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Les Bell Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 4:08 AM To: C. M. Heard Cc: bridge-mib@ietf.org; stds-802-1@ieee.org Subject: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt The changes to the MIB for IEEE 802.1aa include the corrections in draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt. There are also some other significant changes to be done for 802.1aa, due to recent changes in the state machines and the managed objects that reflect this. This work is not complete yet Les.... "C. M. Heard" @ietf.org on 30/07/2003 20:30:07 Sent by: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org To: bridge-mib@ietf.org cc: stds-802-1@ieee.org Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > An alternative option might be to publish the RFC without the MIB > module and just include a pointer to the inline MIB module at the > IEEE web site. Actually, I rather like that idea. It certainly ensures that the stuff in the information RFC can't get out-of-sync with the IEEE's official version. The only problem with that http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/MIBs/802-1x-2001-mib.txt has some problems that make it fail to compile (an illegal expression for the OID assigned as the MODULE-IDENTITY value, non-ascii quotes, and the absence of dot1xPaePortReauthenticate and dot1xAuthSessionUserName from conformance groups). The version in the -01 draft corrected these problems. I see that the IEEE is in fact working on a maintenance release of 802.1X (see http://www.ieee802.org/1/pages/802.1aa.html, or look for the 802.1aa link under http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/1/), and one of the work items is a MIB module update. However, this is in the private area and I don't know whether it includes the corrections mentioned above (nor how else it might differ from the current published version of the IEEE8021-PAE-MIB). Maybe someone from 802.1aa could comment? //cmh _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib ---2133786286-408399451-1059715139=:11354-- _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Aug 1 02:46:35 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA10615 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 02:46:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19iTfz-0002ON-Fa for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 02:46:08 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h716k7Qo009185 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 02:46:07 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19iTft-0002Nm-5t; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 02:46:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19iEjm-00043J-CR for bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:49:02 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA00209 for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:48:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19iEjj-0004mO-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:48:59 -0400 Received: from [206.152.191.132] (helo=deneb.mtghouse.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19iEjj-0004mB-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:48:59 -0400 Received: (qmail 16041 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2003 14:48:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO europa) (192.168.1.134) by deneb.mtghouse.com with SMTP; 31 Jul 2003 14:48:28 -0000 From: "Jim Burns" To: "Les Bell" , "C. M. Heard" Cc: , Subject: RE: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:48:30 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <80256D74.002CA874.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi folks, At the July Plenary we have decided to put the 802.1aa mib back to its original 802.1X state (or as close to it as we can achieve). Those values which are EAP or AAA related (counts of 'request ids' and 'response ids', etc) will have their text changed to indicate that these values will be filled by a functional entity other than the 802.1X PAE(the EAP entity for instance). The reason for this issue is that .1aa clearly dilineates labor between the 802.1X PAE and EAP and AAA. The guiding principle in .1aa is that it is to transport EAP and switch between controlled/uncontrolled port, not interpret EAP, this means it should not look at the EAP header, only the EAPOL header. With this principle, the PAE is unable to keep some MIB statistics and those need to be handled by the appropriate entities (although in actual implementations it is very likely that one piece of software is handling PAE and EAP on the authenticator, the standards are separate). Our options were to: 1. Alter the existing MIB to get the closest values to the current ones while only looking at the EAPOL header. 2. Remove all EAP related values and let the EAP group define their own MIB. 3. Leave the MIB alone and let the text indicate that some values need to be filled by entities other than the PAE. We chose #3 because we don't want to change the MIB for fear that the AP and Bridge manufacturers may not update their MIBs to the new one in a timely fashion and then management software will need to deal with these different MIBs leading to potential interoperability issues. The feeling is that it took a long time for the industry to get the current MIB implemented properly on their equipment, this MIB is extremely important to troubleshooting and we don't want to add yet another potential complexity to wireless access. So, the MIB remains the same, the definition for the values remain the same, but which functional entity is expected to fill some of the values is made more clear. The changes to bring the .1aa MIB back toward the original .1X MIB should be done soon. If you would like to review the changes please let me know and we can send them out to you as soon as we get them done. These will be 'beta' changes as they will still need to go through the IEEE balloting process, but it would allow you to track it and give input. Thanks, Jim B. -----Original Message----- From: owner-stds-802-1@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-1@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Les Bell Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 4:08 AM To: C. M. Heard Cc: bridge-mib@ietf.org; stds-802-1@ieee.org Subject: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt The changes to the MIB for IEEE 802.1aa include the corrections in draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt. There are also some other significant changes to be done for 802.1aa, due to recent changes in the state machines and the managed objects that reflect this. This work is not complete yet Les.... "C. M. Heard" @ietf.org on 30/07/2003 20:30:07 Sent by: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org To: bridge-mib@ietf.org cc: stds-802-1@ieee.org Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > An alternative option might be to publish the RFC without the MIB > module and just include a pointer to the inline MIB module at the > IEEE web site. Actually, I rather like that idea. It certainly ensures that the stuff in the information RFC can't get out-of-sync with the IEEE's official version. The only problem with that http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/MIBs/802-1x-2001-mib.txt has some problems that make it fail to compile (an illegal expression for the OID assigned as the MODULE-IDENTITY value, non-ascii quotes, and the absence of dot1xPaePortReauthenticate and dot1xAuthSessionUserName from conformance groups). The version in the -01 draft corrected these problems. I see that the IEEE is in fact working on a maintenance release of 802.1X (see http://www.ieee802.org/1/pages/802.1aa.html, or look for the 802.1aa link under http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/1/), and one of the work items is a MIB module update. However, this is in the private area and I don't know whether it includes the corrections mentioned above (nor how else it might differ from the current published version of the IEEE8021-PAE-MIB). Maybe someone from 802.1aa could comment? //cmh _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Aug 1 02:46:36 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA10616 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 02:46:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19iTfz-0002OO-Fo for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 02:46:08 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h716k7Qu009186 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 1 Aug 2003 02:46:07 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19iTft-0002Nv-Dk; Fri, 01 Aug 2003 02:46:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19iOgs-0005xt-53 for bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 21:26:42 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id VAA20931 for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 21:26:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19iOgo-0001FX-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 21:26:38 -0400 Received: from shell4.bayarea.net ([209.128.82.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19iOgn-0001FU-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 21:26:37 -0400 Received: from localhost (heard@localhost) by shell4.bayarea.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h711QZI01994 for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:26:35 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: shell4.bayarea.net: heard owned process doing -bs X-Received: from psmtp.com (exprod6mx25.postini.com [12.158.35.165]) by shell4.bayarea.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with SMTP id h6VEmkN00497 for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 07:48:46 -0700 X-Received: from source ([205.219.84.13]) by exprod6mx25.postini.com ([12.158.35.251]) with SMTP; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:48:46 EDT X-Received: from psmtp.com (exprod6mx2.postini.com [12.158.35.142]) by postman.bayarea.net (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with SMTP id h6VEmjcS092661 for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 07:48:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: from source ([207.106.49.21]) by exprod6mx2.postini.com ([12.158.35.251]) with SMTP; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:48:38 EDT X-Received: from deneb.mtghouse.com (unknown [206.152.191.132]) by wink.pobox.com (Postfix) with SMTP id B4F3DFE0D for ; Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:48:31 -0400 (EDT) X-Received: (qmail 16041 invoked from network); 31 Jul 2003 14:48:28 -0000 X-Received: from unknown (HELO europa) (192.168.1.134) by deneb.mtghouse.com with SMTP; 31 Jul 2003 14:48:28 -0000 From: "Jim Burns" To: "Les Bell" , "C. M. Heard" Cc: , Subject: RE: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 10:48:30 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) In-Reply-To: <80256D74.002CA874.00@notesmta.eur.3com.com> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Importance: Normal ReSent-Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2003 18:26:27 -0700 (PDT) ReSent-From: "C. M. Heard" ReSent-To: bridge-mib@ietf.org ReSent-Subject: RE: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt ReSent-Message-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi folks, At the July Plenary we have decided to put the 802.1aa mib back to its original 802.1X state (or as close to it as we can achieve). Those values which are EAP or AAA related (counts of 'request ids' and 'response ids', etc) will have their text changed to indicate that these values will be filled by a functional entity other than the 802.1X PAE(the EAP entity for instance). The reason for this issue is that .1aa clearly dilineates labor between the 802.1X PAE and EAP and AAA. The guiding principle in .1aa is that it is to transport EAP and switch between controlled/uncontrolled port, not interpret EAP, this means it should not look at the EAP header, only the EAPOL header. With this principle, the PAE is unable to keep some MIB statistics and those need to be handled by the appropriate entities (although in actual implementations it is very likely that one piece of software is handling PAE and EAP on the authenticator, the standards are separate). Our options were to: 1. Alter the existing MIB to get the closest values to the current ones while only looking at the EAPOL header. 2. Remove all EAP related values and let the EAP group define their own MIB. 3. Leave the MIB alone and let the text indicate that some values need to be filled by entities other than the PAE. We chose #3 because we don't want to change the MIB for fear that the AP and Bridge manufacturers may not update their MIBs to the new one in a timely fashion and then management software will need to deal with these different MIBs leading to potential interoperability issues. The feeling is that it took a long time for the industry to get the current MIB implemented properly on their equipment, this MIB is extremely important to troubleshooting and we don't want to add yet another potential complexity to wireless access. So, the MIB remains the same, the definition for the values remain the same, but which functional entity is expected to fill some of the values is made more clear. The changes to bring the .1aa MIB back toward the original .1X MIB should be done soon. If you would like to review the changes please let me know and we can send them out to you as soon as we get them done. These will be 'beta' changes as they will still need to go through the IEEE balloting process, but it would allow you to track it and give input. Thanks, Jim B. -----Original Message----- From: owner-stds-802-1@majordomo.ieee.org [mailto:owner-stds-802-1@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Les Bell Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 4:08 AM To: C. M. Heard Cc: bridge-mib@ietf.org; stds-802-1@ieee.org Subject: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt The changes to the MIB for IEEE 802.1aa include the corrections in draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt. There are also some other significant changes to be done for 802.1aa, due to recent changes in the state machines and the managed objects that reflect this. This work is not complete yet Les.... "C. M. Heard" @ietf.org on 30/07/2003 20:30:07 Sent by: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org To: bridge-mib@ietf.org cc: stds-802-1@ieee.org Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > An alternative option might be to publish the RFC without the MIB > module and just include a pointer to the inline MIB module at the > IEEE web site. Actually, I rather like that idea. It certainly ensures that the stuff in the information RFC can't get out-of-sync with the IEEE's official version. The only problem with that http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/MIBs/802-1x-2001-mib.txt has some problems that make it fail to compile (an illegal expression for the OID assigned as the MODULE-IDENTITY value, non-ascii quotes, and the absence of dot1xPaePortReauthenticate and dot1xAuthSessionUserName from conformance groups). The version in the -01 draft corrected these problems. I see that the IEEE is in fact working on a maintenance release of 802.1X (see http://www.ieee802.org/1/pages/802.1aa.html, or look for the 802.1aa link under http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/1/), and one of the work items is a MIB module update. However, this is in the private area and I don't know whether it includes the corrections mentioned above (nor how else it might differ from the current published version of the IEEE8021-PAE-MIB). Maybe someone from 802.1aa could comment? //cmh _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Aug 4 00:44:43 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA04631 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 00:44:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19jXCj-0007l1-7O for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:44:19 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h744iHq1029815 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 00:44:17 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19jXCT-0007hH-DM; Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:44:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19jXCP-0007ft-HF for bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:43:57 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id AAA04595 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 00:43:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19jXCM-00061j-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:43:54 -0400 Received: from h000.c001.snv.cp.net ([209.228.32.114] helo=c001.snv.cp.net) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19jXCL-00061g-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2003 00:43:54 -0400 Received: (cpmta 14637 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2003 21:43:53 -0700 Received: from 24.221.253.53 (HELO NPCKCN) by smtp.register-admin.com (209.228.32.114) with SMTP; 3 Aug 2003 21:43:53 -0700 X-Sent: 4 Aug 2003 04:43:53 GMT Message-ID: <00a901c35a42$ff38a6b0$770f880a@NPCKCN> From: "K.C. Norseth" To: "Jim Burns" , "Les Bell" , "C. M. Heard" Cc: , References: Subject: Re: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 22:43:48 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sorry for the late response, I just got back in town. I did question the copyright when I placed it in the mib, I guess the benefit of this problem is that we will get the powers that be to decide how to handle this in future rfc's. In summary, so far, I am seeing 2 alternatives: 1 Change the copyright to fit what the IEEE lawyers and IETF lawyers decide. 2: Remove the mib and reference the document in the IEEE website. There are corrections that needed to happen on the mib to make it compile (please ignore my screw up on the complile.). If we want to point to the IEEE website, those changes need to be fixed. Point #1 still needs to be addressed on how we address this. Once this is addressed, I think that #1 will be the best soution. K.C. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jim Burns" To: "Les Bell" ; "C. M. Heard" Cc: ; Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 8:48 AM Subject: RE: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt > Hi folks, > At the July Plenary we have decided to put the 802.1aa mib back to its > original 802.1X state (or as close to it as we can achieve). Those values > which are EAP or AAA related (counts of 'request ids' and 'response ids', > etc) will have their text changed to indicate that these values will be > filled by a functional entity other than the 802.1X PAE(the EAP entity for > instance). > The reason for this issue is that .1aa clearly dilineates labor between > the 802.1X PAE and EAP and AAA. The guiding principle in .1aa is that it is > to transport EAP and switch between controlled/uncontrolled port, not > interpret EAP, this means it should not look at the EAP header, only the > EAPOL header. With this principle, the PAE is unable to keep some MIB > statistics and those need to be handled by the appropriate entities > (although in actual implementations it is very likely that one piece of > software is handling PAE and EAP on the authenticator, the standards are > separate). > Our options were to: > 1. Alter the existing MIB to get the closest values to the current > ones while only looking at the EAPOL header. > 2. Remove all EAP related values and let the EAP group define their > own MIB. > 3. Leave the MIB alone and let the text indicate that some values > need to be filled by entities other than the PAE. > We chose #3 because we don't want to change the MIB for fear that the AP > and Bridge manufacturers may not update their MIBs to the new one in a > timely fashion and then management software will need to deal with these > different MIBs leading to potential interoperability issues. The feeling is > that it took a long time for the industry to get the current MIB implemented > properly on their equipment, this MIB is extremely important to > troubleshooting and we don't want to add yet another potential complexity to > wireless access. So, the MIB remains the same, the definition for the > values remain the same, but which functional entity is expected to fill some > of the values is made more clear. > The changes to bring the .1aa MIB back toward the original .1X MIB should > be done soon. > If you would like to review the changes please let me know and we can > send them out to you as soon as we get them done. These will be 'beta' > changes as they will still need to go through the IEEE balloting process, > but it would allow you to track it and give input. > Thanks, > Jim B. > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-stds-802-1@majordomo.ieee.org > [mailto:owner-stds-802-1@majordomo.ieee.org]On Behalf Of Les Bell > Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 4:08 AM > To: C. M. Heard > Cc: bridge-mib@ietf.org; stds-802-1@ieee.org > Subject: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D > ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt > > > > > > > The changes to the MIB for IEEE 802.1aa include the corrections in > draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt. > > There are also some other significant changes to be done for 802.1aa, due to > recent changes in the state machines and the managed objects that reflect > this. > This work is not complete yet > > Les.... > > > > > > "C. M. Heard" @ietf.org on 30/07/2003 20:30:07 > > Sent by: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org > > > To: bridge-mib@ietf.org > cc: stds-802-1@ieee.org > Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt > > > On Wed, 30 Jul 2003, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote: > > An alternative option might be to publish the RFC without the MIB > > module and just include a pointer to the inline MIB module at the > > IEEE web site. > > Actually, I rather like that idea. It certainly ensures that the > stuff in the information RFC can't get out-of-sync with the IEEE's > official version. The only problem with that > > http://www.ieee802.org/1/files/public/MIBs/802-1x-2001-mib.txt > > has some problems that make it fail to compile (an illegal expression > for the OID assigned as the MODULE-IDENTITY value, non-ascii quotes, > and the absence of dot1xPaePortReauthenticate and > dot1xAuthSessionUserName from conformance groups). The version in > the -01 draft corrected these problems. > > I see that the IEEE is in fact working on a maintenance release of > 802.1X (see http://www.ieee802.org/1/pages/802.1aa.html, or look for > the 802.1aa link under http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/1/), and > one of the work items is a MIB module update. However, this is in > the private area and I don't know whether it includes the > corrections mentioned above (nor how else it might differ from the > current published version of the IEEE8021-PAE-MIB). > > Maybe someone from 802.1aa could comment? > > //cmh > > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge-mib mailing list > Bridge-mib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge-mib mailing list > Bridge-mib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib > > _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From exim@www1.ietf.org Mon Aug 4 13:59:27 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA05673 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 13:59:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19jjbp-0007O8-T9 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2003 13:59:02 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h74Hx1sL028387 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 13:59:01 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19jjbp-0007Mf-6x; Mon, 04 Aug 2003 13:59:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19jjb7-0007M1-Ou for bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2003 13:58:17 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with SMTP id NAA05630 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 13:58:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19jjb5-0004Lx-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2003 13:58:15 -0400 Received: from shell4.bayarea.net ([209.128.82.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19jjb4-0004Lu-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Mon, 04 Aug 2003 13:58:14 -0400 Received: from localhost (heard@localhost) by shell4.bayarea.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h74HwDU23931; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 10:58:13 -0700 X-Authentication-Warning: shell4.bayarea.net: heard owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 10:58:11 -0700 (PDT) From: "C. M. Heard" X-Sender: heard@shell4.bayarea.net To: bridge-mib@ietf.org cc: stds-802-1@ieee.org Subject: Re: [802.1] RE: [Bridge-mib] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-bridge-8021x-02.txt In-Reply-To: <00a901c35a42$ff38a6b0$770f880a@NPCKCN> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, 3 Aug 2003, K.C. Norseth wrote: > I did question the copyright when I placed it in the mib, I > guess the benefit of this problem is that we will get the powers > that be to decide how to handle this in future rfc's. Indeed. There has been some discussion of the issue on the ipr-wg mailing list ... see the thread starting with http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/ipr-wg/current/msg01839.html and in particular see http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/ipr-wg/current/msg01859.html > In summary, so far, I am seeing 2 alternatives: > 1 Change the copyright to fit what the IEEE lawyers and IETF lawyers > decide. > 2: Remove the mib and reference the document in the IEEE website. > > There are corrections that needed to happen on the mib to make > it compile (please ignore my screw up on the complile.). If we > want to point to the IEEE website, those changes need to be > fixed. > > Point #1 still needs to be addressed on how we address this. > Once this is addressed, I think that #1 will be the best > soution. I agree with all of these points. Mike _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Aug 14 01:29:28 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA17557 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:29:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19nAfV-0006DR-NC for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:29:01 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h7E5T1Yp023882 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:29:01 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19nAfU-0006Cy-IY; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:29:00 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19nAed-0006CT-Gr for bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:28:07 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA17511 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:28:03 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19nAea-0007Xt-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:28:04 -0400 Received: from [203.199.83.148] (helo=rediffmail.com) by ietf-mx with smtp (Exim 4.12) id 19nAeY-0007Xo-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 01:28:03 -0400 Received: (qmail 19382 invoked by uid 510); 14 Aug 2003 05:26:45 -0000 Date: 14 Aug 2003 05:26:45 -0000 Message-ID: <20030814052645.19381.qmail@webmail26.rediffmail.com> Received: from unknown (203.197.138.194) by rediffmail.com via HTTP; 14 aug 2003 05:26:45 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 From: "NK Krishnan" Reply-To: "NK Krishnan" To: bridge-mib@ietf.org Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline Subject: [Bridge-mib] Clarification on dot1dStpPortEnable and ForcePortState for STP/RSTP. Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Hi All, I had a look into the latest draft of Bridge MIB and I have a doubt regarding dot1dStpPortEnable. 1. What is the expected behaviour of the port in STP when the object is set to disabled? 2. What is the effect of setting this object on L2 and L3 Data forwarding ? As I understand, dot1dStpPortEnable is to be used to enable/disable STP on a port. i.e STP calculation exclude this port. In case of RSTP, the port will be in Disabled/Discarding. Is it proper to apply STP roles/States to a port that is not under the control of STP? When we set this object to disabled, should this port stop forwarding Layer 2 packets? What is the relation between dot1dStpPortEnable and ifMainStaus of the interface? Thanks in advance, Navaneeth. ___________________________________________________ Meet your old school or college friends from 1 Million + database... Click here to reunite www.batchmates.com/rediff.asp _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From exim@www1.ietf.org Thu Aug 14 17:36:28 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA27483 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 17:36:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19nPlK-0001aq-KU for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 17:36:03 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h7ELa2A8006104 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 17:36:02 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19nPlK-0001a2-7v; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 17:36:02 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19nPkc-0001Yy-Fo for bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 17:35:23 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA27444 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 17:35:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19nPka-00067S-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 17:35:16 -0400 Received: from ihemail1.lucent.com ([192.11.222.161] helo=ihemail1.firewall.lucent.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19nPkZ-00066P-00 for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 17:35:15 -0400 Received: from nl0006exch001h.wins.lucent.com (h135-85-76-62.lucent.com [135.85.76.62]) by ihemail1.firewall.lucent.com (Switch-2.2.0/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id h7ELYf723431 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 16:34:42 -0500 (CDT) Received: by nl0006exch001h.nl.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 23:34:36 +0200 Message-ID: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B1550236179D@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" To: "Bridge-Mib (E-mail)" , "MIBs (E-mail)" Cc: Les Bell , Tony Jeffree , "C. M. Heard" Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] RE: VLAn ID Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 23:34:32 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , So... what do we do for a common (or a few) common TCs. Anyone wants to write a I-D for it? It seems like we would define the VlanIDOrAny as (0..4095) now and make 4095 mean "wildcard" There is another MIB coming up in the IPCDN WG that wants to define a VlanIDOrAny (not a TC, but the concetp) for one of their objects. If we could give them guidance on what to do (soon), that would be great. Thanks, Bert > -----Original Message----- > From: Les Bell [mailto:Les_Bell@eur.3com.com] > Sent: dinsdag 10 juni 2003 12:10 > To: C. M. Heard > Cc: Tony Jeffree; MIBs (E-mail); Bridge-Mib (E-mail) > Subject: Re: [Bridge-mib] RE: VLAn ID > > > > > > I agree that no changes are required to clause 12 of 802.1Q. > > Les... > > > > > > "C. M. Heard" @ietf.org on 07/06/2003 04:07:22 > > Sent by: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org > > > To: Tony Jeffree > cc: "MIBs , "Bridge-Mib > Subject: [Bridge-mib] RE: VLAn ID > > > On Fri, 6 Jun 2003, in a message forwarded by Bert Wijnen, > Tony Jeffree wrote: > > We have concluded that the use of 4095 as a wildcard is > > acceptable to 802.1, and we will make any necessary changes to > > 802.1Q in due course to relax the current stated restriction. > > However, we need to know whether that is all that needs to be > > done to 802.1Q - i.e., is there any need to change our > > definitions of the managed objects in the document (Clause 12) > > to reflect the interpretation of 4095 as a wildcard, or is this > > simply an issue for the SNMP machinery to handle? > > After a quick look at 802.1Q-1998, 802.1u-2001, and 802.1v-2001 it > appears to me that no changes are required to clause 12 of 802.1Q. > > Can any Bridge-Mib folk confirm that? > > //cmh > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge-mib mailing list > Bridge-mib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib > > > > > _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Aug 19 11:46:28 2003 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA19240 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:46:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19p8gM-0002p1-AG for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:46:02 -0400 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h7JFk2d3010836 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:46:02 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19p8gL-0002oc-Nj; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:46:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 19p8fR-0002nA-4Q for bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:45:05 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA19162 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:45:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Les_Bell@3Com.com Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19p8fQ-0002Pe-00 for Bridge-mib@ietf.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:45:04 -0400 Received: from [216.148.100.47] (helo=KLHNT) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19p8fM-0002Oi-00 for Bridge-mib@ietf.org; Tue, 19 Aug 2003 11:45:01 -0400 To: Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 9:44:59 --0600 X-MailScanner: Found to be clean Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_NextPart_000_001AB4B4" Message-Id: Subject: [Bridge-mib] Thank you! Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , This is a multipart message in MIME format --_NextPart_000_001AB4B4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit See the attached file for details --_NextPart_000_001AB4B4 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit [Filename: wicked_scr.scr, Content-Type: application/octet-stream] The attachment file in the message has been removed by eManager. --_NextPart_000_001AB4B4-- _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib