Skip to main content

Remote Network Monitoring MIB Extensions for Switched Networks Version 1.0
draft-ietf-rmonmib-smon-07

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2012-08-22
07 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Scott Hollenbeck
2006-03-29
07 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2006-03-16
07 (System) [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Alex Zinin by IESG Secretary
2006-03-16
07 Margaret Cullen [Ballot Position Update] Position for Margaret Wasserman has been changed to No Objection from Undefined by Margaret Wasserman
2006-03-16
07 Mark Townsley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Mark Townsley by Mark Townsley
2006-03-16
07 Bert Wijnen
[Ballot comment]
To answer Allison:
That would me we have to open up editing of RFC2613.
And the immediate result would be a quite …
[Ballot comment]
To answer Allison:
That would me we have to open up editing of RFC2613.
And the immediate result would be a quite sizeable effort
to live up to all the lastest boilerplate, admin, IPR,
split-in-references, etc etc type of bureaucratic work.

The WG did consider that option and concluded against it.

So my solution is: advance in grade AS IS.
2006-03-16
07 Brian Carpenter [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Brian Carpenter by Brian Carpenter
2006-03-16
07 Jon Peterson [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Jon Peterson by Jon Peterson
2006-03-16
07 Bill Fenner [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Bill Fenner by Bill Fenner
2006-03-16
07 Allison Mankin [Ballot Position Update] Position for Allison Mankin has been changed to No Objection from Undefined by Allison Mankin
2006-03-16
07 Allison Mankin
[Ballot comment]
This can be settled by Bert/Dan to their own satisfaction; it
does not have to come back to me:

Could a Note to …
[Ballot comment]
This can be settled by Bert/Dan to their own satisfaction; it
does not have to come back to me:

Could a Note to the RFC Editor specify that a risk in this
MIB includes not just obtaining sensitive control information but
actually controlling the port copy settings.  This means opportunities
for eavesdropping and hijacking.  We expect MIB Security Considerations
to describe more of the risks now than they did in 1999.
2006-03-16
07 Allison Mankin [Ballot Position Update] New position, Undefined, has been recorded for Allison Mankin by Allison Mankin
2006-03-16
07 David Kessens [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for David Kessens by David Kessens
2006-03-15
07 Sam Hartman [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Sam Hartman by Sam Hartman
2006-03-15
07 Margaret Cullen [Ballot Position Update] New position, Undefined, has been recorded for Margaret Wasserman by Margaret Wasserman
2006-03-14
07 Ted Hardie [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Ted Hardie by Ted Hardie
2006-03-14
07 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded for Russ Housley by Russ Housley
2006-03-14
07 Scott Hollenbeck
[Ballot comment]
There are a few entries in the implementation report that list only one vendor's response:

entPhysicalEntry.                …
[Ballot comment]
There are a few entries in the implementation report that list only one vendor's response:

entPhysicalEntry.                | x |  |  |  |
N:1                                  |  |  | x |  |
N:M                                  |  |  | x |  |

Apparently these are optional features that don't have an impact on interoperability.
2006-03-14
07 Scott Hollenbeck [Ballot Position Update] Position for Scott Hollenbeck has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Scott Hollenbeck
2006-03-13
07 Scott Hollenbeck
[Ballot discuss]
There are a few entries in the implementation report that list only one vendor's response:

entPhysicalEntry.                …
[Ballot discuss]
There are a few entries in the implementation report that list only one vendor's response:

entPhysicalEntry.                  | x |  |  |  |
N:1                                  |  |  | x |  |
N:M                                  |  |  | x |  |

Are these anything to worry about?
2006-03-13
07 Scott Hollenbeck [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded for Scott Hollenbeck by Scott Hollenbeck
2006-03-08
07 Bert Wijnen [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Bert Wijnen
2006-03-08
07 Bert Wijnen Ballot has been issued by Bert Wijnen
2006-03-08
07 Bert Wijnen Created "Approve" ballot
1999-04-08
07 (System) IESG has approved the document
1999-03-01
07 (System) Last call sent
1999-02-28
07 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
1999-02-28
07 (System) Last call text was added
1999-02-28
07 (System) Ballot approval text was added
1999-02-17
07 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-rmonmib-smon-07.txt
1998-12-16
06 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-rmonmib-smon-06.txt
1998-11-04
05 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-rmonmib-smon-05.txt
1998-04-10
04 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-rmonmib-smon-04.txt
1997-09-15
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-rmonmib-smon-03.txt
1997-07-22
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-rmonmib-smon-01.txt