The MPLS WG Archive

[Cheenu Srinivasan <csrinivasan@tachion.com>]

Title: RE: consensus to make draft-kompella-mpls-te-mib-00.txt a TEWG item?

Jim Boyle wrote:
>
> Should Kireeti's draft
> a) be accepted as a TE WG item at this time?
> b) not be accepted as a TE WG item at this time?

Kireeti's MIB doesn't address numerous issues that would be necessary in a
standard TE MIB. It supports a very limited model of TE using MPLS (specific
to Juniper's switches). And, to put it bluntly, its quite badly designed
stylistically as well. Its not a good idea to forget to "keep things as simple
as possible but no simpler" or we would end up with

There already exists, and has existed for quite a while, a TE MIB in the
mplswg. This MIB is generic and has evolved to incorporate the comments of
the mplswg. Also, it has been deployed in several switches. And, there are
very good operational and implementation reasons

So, Kireeti's draft should not be a working group document. If there is any
functionality that is needed in the existing TE MIB, based on WG consensus,
it can be added and that is the best course of action at this point.

>It'd be nice to limit the distro to <te-wg@uu.net>, unless there is
>objection, to limit sorting through duplicate messages.

Many people with an interest in this thread may not be subscribed to the
TE list. Let's keep the discussion on both lists.

Thanks,
Cheenu