From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:05:06 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61CB221F8CDB for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:05:06 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nchlP37LMl6c for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:05:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBBD121F8CDA for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:05:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46260 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJL0-0004nw-J8; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:04:50 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:04:47 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/20#comment:3 Message-ID: <079.028513c9af06ed8cb390e847cdfb8bd7@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.800bc0481e0d9df1845e35ac65157339@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 20 In-Reply-To: <064.800bc0481e0d9df1845e35ac65157339@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #20: g. Add a reference to some external definition X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:05:06 -0000 #20: g. Add a reference to some external definition Comment (by jparello@cisco.com): Can be closed added: There are twelve Power States, that expand on [IEEE1621]. The expanded list of Power States are derived from [CISCO-EW] and are divided into six operational states, and six non-operational states. [CISCO-EW] "Cisco EnergyWise Design Guide", John Parello, Roland Saville, Steve Kramling, Cisco Validated Designs, September 2010 -- ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: jparello@cisco.com Type: defect | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:13:45 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE13921F8BC2 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:13:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cfCiQgH8IRIc for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:13:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1500D21F8BB9 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:13:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46728 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJSx-0006TZ-Pt; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:13:03 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: bnordman@lbl.gov, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:13:03 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/12#comment:5 Message-ID: <079.ecd093b7f4ef92eb46fc63d833321ab0@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.9a8404aa8b8749382a7ecb93a3197acb@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 12 In-Reply-To: <064.9a8404aa8b8749382a7ecb93a3197acb@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: bnordman@lbl.gov, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #12: how summation occurs X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:13:45 -0000 #12: how summation occurs Comment (by jparello@cisco.com): Waiting for Brian Trammell -- ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: bnordman@lbl.gov Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:13:54 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A2FE21F8C84 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:13:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EmBVZrhwiswm for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:13:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8378821F8C55 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:13:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46735 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJTf-0006UQ-Ib; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:13:47 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: bnordman@lbl.gov, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:13:47 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/17#comment:3 Message-ID: <079.965690eaa5f27298453358707e965c07@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.056e9f519f85063bc7514e0a8142259d@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 17 In-Reply-To: <064.056e9f519f85063bc7514e0a8142259d@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: bnordman@lbl.gov, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #17: d. Is aggregation a relationship, or just a function? X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:13:54 -0000 #17: d. Is aggregation a relationship, or just a function? Comment (by jparello@cisco.com): Wiating for Brian Tremmal -- ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: bnordman@lbl.gov Type: defect | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:16:05 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 687EF21F8CDF for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:16:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gqqnzPn48eFk for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:16:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3355721F8CDB for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:16:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47028 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJVp-0002Nt-EC; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:16:01 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: jparello@cisco.com X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:16:01 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/18#comment:2 Message-ID: <079.797f6ab003c4267c95100377e61051b9@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.2ad61fae1de35f8b0f450b78221319e2@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 18 In-Reply-To: <064.2ad61fae1de35f8b0f450b78221319e2@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: jparello@cisco.com, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #18: e. Clarify relation among aggregation, proxying, and IP/non-IP devices (section 5) X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:16:05 -0000 #18: e. Clarify relation among aggregation, proxying, and IP/non-IP devices (section 5) Comment (by jparello@cisco.com): Waiting for text on what the issue is from Bruce -- ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: all Type: defect | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:18:59 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DBBD21F8CB6 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:18:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4SLkVP51U1D4 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:18:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CCD821F8C84 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:18:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47166 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJYK-0007yy-Uz; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:18:36 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:18:36 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/20#comment:4 Message-ID: <079.95dd5250abd5df03ea1dad0fd02c5e71@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.800bc0481e0d9df1845e35ac65157339@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 20 In-Reply-To: <064.800bc0481e0d9df1845e35ac65157339@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #20: g. Add a reference to some external definition X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:18:59 -0000 #20: g. Add a reference to some external definition Changes (by n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz): * status: new => closed * resolution: => fixed -- ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: jparello@cisco.com Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: minor | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: fixed Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+--------------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:26:37 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC85F21F8602 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:26:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id UVpuyo0sl82D for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:26:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DDF221F85F5 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:26:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47695 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJfz-0000vV-Fv; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:26:31 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: jparello@cisco.com X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:26:30 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/18#comment:3 Message-ID: <079.7e7e90d82a0b318f7820a1e788cebf7d@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.2ad61fae1de35f8b0f450b78221319e2@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 18 In-Reply-To: <064.2ad61fae1de35f8b0f450b78221319e2@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: jparello@cisco.com, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #18: e. Clarify relation among aggregation, proxying, and IP/non-IP devices (section 5) X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:26:38 -0000 #18: e. Clarify relation among aggregation, proxying, and IP/non-IP devices (section 5) Comment (by jparello@cisco.com): added: The proxied device may or may not be IP connect. When it is IP connected the communication may be via SNMP or any other protocol. -- ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: all Type: defect | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:27:57 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E3A121F8C23 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:27:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8PTwQx9pzfOx for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:27:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB4B721F8BF3 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:27:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47719 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJhJ-0005pV-2l; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:27:53 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:27:52 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/18#comment:4 Message-ID: <079.d90856901424f6daae98af94a4aba375@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.2ad61fae1de35f8b0f450b78221319e2@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 18 In-Reply-To: <064.2ad61fae1de35f8b0f450b78221319e2@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #18: e. Clarify relation among aggregation, proxying, and IP/non-IP devices (section 5) X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:27:57 -0000 #18: e. Clarify relation among aggregation, proxying, and IP/non-IP devices (section 5) Changes (by n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz): * status: new => closed * resolution: => fixed -- ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: all Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: minor | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: fixed Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:32:01 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 833CE21F86F7 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:32:01 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id GTyKwLyKL+sP for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:32:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB7B821F868E for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:32:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47832 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJl8-0006PR-88; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:31:50 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, jparello@cisco.com X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:31:49 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/22#comment:3 Message-ID: <079.4419e69523da3c928753860b3d713752@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.71f954de497add7ce356c6764dff7588@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 22 In-Reply-To: <064.71f954de497add7ce356c6764dff7588@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, jparello@cisco.com, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #22: i. Are there any power source or metering relationships that are not covered by data present about the wiring topology? X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:32:01 -0000 #22: i. Are there any power source or metering relationships that are not covered by data present about the wiring topology? Comment (by jparello@cisco.com): close this has been discussed -- ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: all Type: defect | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:33:29 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E7F321F8C64 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:33:29 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id woR8koqi2dKe for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:33:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69B8B21F87CA for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:33:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48073 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJmd-0005Sv-25; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:33:23 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, jparello@cisco.com X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:33:23 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/22#comment:4 Message-ID: <079.523fbe2bf898e25952fdb80383210c47@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.71f954de497add7ce356c6764dff7588@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 22 In-Reply-To: <064.71f954de497add7ce356c6764dff7588@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, jparello@cisco.com, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #22: i. Are there any power source or metering relationships that are not covered by data present about the wiring topology? X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:33:29 -0000 #22: i. Are there any power source or metering relationships that are not covered by data present about the wiring topology? Changes (by n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz): * status: new => closed * resolution: => fixed -- ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: all Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: minor | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: fixed Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:42:45 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 408F121F8AF5 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:42:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TT48xKhQ6knR for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:42:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98BE421F8690 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:42:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48477 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJvR-0002xd-K9; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:42:29 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: bnordman@lbl.gov, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:42:29 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/17#comment:4 Message-ID: <079.05b2a7f9d3736d32ca5ffc83b4ad9ef0@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.056e9f519f85063bc7514e0a8142259d@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 17 In-Reply-To: <064.056e9f519f85063bc7514e0a8142259d@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: bnordman@lbl.gov, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #17: d. Is aggregation a relationship, or just a function? X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:42:45 -0000 #17: d. Is aggregation a relationship, or just a function? Comment (by jparello@cisco.com): Bruce Benoit and Brian to come up with a paragraph and Benoit will own this issue. -- ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: bnordman@lbl.gov Type: defect | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:44:00 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0271421F880C for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:44:00 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O3VwoXvCBaSz for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:43:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2583C21F84F2 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:43:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48701 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJwk-0007Fv-3O; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:43:50 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: bclaise@cisco.com, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, bnordman@lbl.gov X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:43:49 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/12#comment:6 Message-ID: <079.a9c4aa10d97fafe8e73aa5cc22d55def@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.9a8404aa8b8749382a7ecb93a3197acb@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 12 In-Reply-To: <064.9a8404aa8b8749382a7ecb93a3197acb@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: bclaise@cisco.com, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, bnordman@lbl.gov, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #12: how summation occurs X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:44:00 -0000 #12: how summation occurs Changes (by n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz): * owner: bnordman@lbl.gov => bclaise@cisco.com -- ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: bclaise@cisco.com Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:45:04 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CE1521F880C for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:45:04 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 2uHvKdOUWHYb for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:45:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B188E21F8654 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:45:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48722 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJxs-0004Wj-D3; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:45:00 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: bclaise@cisco.com, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:45:00 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/17#comment:5 Message-ID: <079.2a6f49272b4cd9e28f5dcd143d69846f@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.056e9f519f85063bc7514e0a8142259d@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 17 In-Reply-To: <064.056e9f519f85063bc7514e0a8142259d@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: bclaise@cisco.com, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #17: d. Is aggregation a relationship, or just a function? X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:45:04 -0000 #17: d. Is aggregation a relationship, or just a function? Changes (by n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz): * owner: bnordman@lbl.gov => bclaise@cisco.com -- ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: bclaise@cisco.com Type: defect | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+-------------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:45:31 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA1D321F880C for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:45:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id k+p4A5ZoVNIg for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:45:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1848421F8654 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:45:31 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48760 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgJyF-0005w4-Bj; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:45:23 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: bnordman@lbl.gov, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, jparello@cisco.com X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:45:23 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/21#comment:5 Message-ID: <079.4f7baee5cae33ae22f777f3a2584a03c@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.71cdaa9804b4d5542ef8cf6433ee0054@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 21 In-Reply-To: <064.71cdaa9804b4d5542ef8cf6433ee0054@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: bnordman@lbl.gov, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, jparello@cisco.com, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #21: h. Clarify the intended application of the Domain concept? X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:45:32 -0000 #21: h. Clarify the intended application of the Domain concept? Comment (by jparello@cisco.com): "Typically down stream of a meter but doesn't have to be." Check the doc that it is the same everywhere. -- ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: bnordman@lbl.gov Type: defect | Status: new Priority: minor | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+------------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 5 10:52:18 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD85F21F8BA4 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:52:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rBaCCq-S0WdS for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:52:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from grenache.tools.ietf.org (grenache.tools.ietf.org [IPv6:2a01:3f0:1:2::30]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30A0921F8B9A for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 10:52:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49082 helo=grenache.tools.ietf.org ident=www-data) by grenache.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1TgK4j-00073e-TU; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 19:52:05 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.3 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.3, by Edgewall Software To: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, jparello@cisco.com X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:52:05 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/4#comment:9 Message-ID: <079.b3b28dca8e944f0eb2a22d22902e80af@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.7a9d450cca2046de189ad1ffa76f63de@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 4 In-Reply-To: <064.7a9d450cca2046de189ad1ffa76f63de@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 127.0.0.1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, jparello@cisco.com, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on grenache.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #4: Reorganise sections X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2012 18:52:18 -0000 #4: Reorganise sections Comment (by jparello@cisco.com): Pick up at section 3 -- ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz | Owner: all Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: Keywords: | ---------------------------------------+------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 12 10:32:57 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E932121E80F5 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 10:32:57 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7nUYWnAret+Y for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 10:32:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from gamay.tools.ietf.org (unknown [IPv6:2607:f170:8000:1500::de]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7919D21E80BC for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 10:32:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=gamay.tools.ietf.org) by gamay.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Tir6w-0005XK-Tk; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:32:50 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.2 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.2, by Edgewall Software To: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 18:32:50 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/5#comment:3 Message-ID: <079.059a3be37f8f3f302a06324b494f7f5a@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.8a16c0d42ca3152971660ffdd608afc8@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 5 In-Reply-To: <064.8a16c0d42ca3152971660ffdd608afc8@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on gamay.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #5: Review UML with latest draft from Monitoring MIB/Aware. X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 18:32:58 -0000 #5: Review UML with latest draft from Monitoring MIB/Aware. Changes (by n.brownlee@…): * status: new => closed * resolution: => fixed Comment: Discussed on 12 Dec 12, Benoit has the list of agreed points -- --------------------------+------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@… | Owner: bclaise Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: major | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: fixed Keywords: | --------------------------+------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org Wed Dec 12 13:52:48 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 999B221F85C4 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:52:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jKx675gqMNVD for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:52:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from gamay.tools.ietf.org (unknown [IPv6:2607:f170:8000:1500::de]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38C3B21F85A4 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 13:52:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=gamay.tools.ietf.org) by gamay.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TiuE8-0003Tj-To; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 16:52:28 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit From: "eman issue tracker" X-Trac-Version: 0.12.2 Precedence: bulk Auto-Submitted: auto-generated X-Mailer: Trac 0.12.2, by Edgewall Software To: bclaise@cisco.com, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, bnordman@lbl.gov X-Trac-Project: eman Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 21:52:28 -0000 X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/eman/ X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/eman/trac/ticket/12#comment:7 Message-ID: <079.469421f6ceab382e685fe7c5ab1e98bc@trac.tools.ietf.org> References: <064.9a8404aa8b8749382a7ecb93a3197acb@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 12 In-Reply-To: <064.9a8404aa8b8749382a7ecb93a3197acb@trac.tools.ietf.org> X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: bclaise@cisco.com, jparello@cisco.com, n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz, bnordman@lbl.gov, eman@ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac+eman@trac.tools.ietf.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on gamay.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: Re: [eman] #12: how summation occurs X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 21:52:48 -0000 #12: how summation occurs Changes (by n.brownlee@…): * status: new => closed * resolution: => fixed Comment: Benoit proposes text: When aggregation occurs across a set of entities, some of the values may be missing. The EMAN framework does not specify how these should be treated, as different implementations may have good reason to take different approaches. One common treatment is to define the sum as missing if any of the constituent elements are missing (useful to be most precise). Another is to treat the missing value as zero (useful to have continuous data streams). -- --------------------------+------------------------- Reporter: n.brownlee@… | Owner: bclaise@… Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: major | Milestone: milestone1 Component: framework | Version: 1.0 Severity: - | Resolution: fixed Keywords: | --------------------------+------------------------- Ticket URL: eman From Quittek@neclab.eu Wed Dec 12 21:33:04 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE2CA21F85FD for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 21:33:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y0rtJX4EHQTI for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 21:33:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu (mailer1.neclab.eu [195.37.70.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DA2021F8608 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 21:32:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B9AF102986; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:32:53 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Amavisd on Debian GNU/Linux (netlab.nec.de) Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlas-a.office.hd [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QqlLgBvtq7Wd; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:32:53 +0100 (CET) Received: from ENCELADUS.office.hd (enceladus.office.hd [192.168.24.52]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 817DA10280A; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:32:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from PALLENE.office.hd ([169.254.1.222]) by ENCELADUS.office.hd ([192.168.24.52]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 06:31:48 +0100 From: Juergen Quittek To: Benoit Claise , eman mailing list Thread-Topic: [eman] EMAN-REQ: 5.7.2. Time series interval types Thread-Index: AQHN2PMk7T7qn5u7k0SktnWN6Oje/Q== Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 05:31:47 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <507454A9.2020806@cisco.com> Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.14.0.111121 x-originating-ip: [10.7.0.92] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <12E3D1ABAC9EC74486B75C707D2395FD@office.hd> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [eman] EMAN-REQ: 5.7.2. Time series interval types X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 05:33:04 -0000 Hi Benoit, Here comes a very late reply. It is still relevant, since the point you are raising is unchanged in the current version of the requirements. On 09.10.12 18:45, "Benoit Claise" wrote: > > =20 > =20 > Hi, > =20 > I looked at > =20 >http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-eman-requirements-09.txt, > and I have a question > What does the following new requirement mean and imply? > 5.7.2. Time series interval types The standard must provide means >for supporting alternative interval > types. Requirement 5.5.2 applies to every reported time value. > =20 > From > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-eman-energy-monitoring-mib-03 > There are three eoEnergyParametersIntervalMode types used for > energy measurement collection: period, sliding, and total. The > choices of the the three different modes of collection are based > on IEC standard 61850-7-4. > While we can have a new entry in eoEnergyParametersIntervalMode... > eoEnergyParametersIntervalMode OBJECT-TYPE > SYNTAX INTEGER { > period(1), > sliding(2), > total(3) > } > MAX-ACCESS read-create > ... I'm slightly concerned that the new interval types might involve > different indices, so basically new MIB tables. I think the requirements cover well what is needed. 61850-7-4 introduced the new sliding window scheme one year ago and as the requirements are written we can fully support this in the MIB design. And concerning this requirement, the current MIB design is in line with it. However, I don't see a point in reverse engineering the requirements from variables in the current version of the MIB module. The current module is a good exercise to show how it can look like in the end. We are about to finishing the requirements and the framework document. After these are final, we can discuss MIB details. I am not concerned about us adding more indices to the current MIB. We don't have to do this. I would rather look at ways to reduces its current complexity where possible. Best regards, Juergen > Regards, Benoit (as a contributor) > =20 > >_______________________________________________ >eman mailing list >eman@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eman From Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Thu Dec 13 10:51:38 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 017C121F88E4; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:51:38 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.532 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.532 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.067, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0x2cfqGToxXx; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:51:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AB9A21F88BF; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:51:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.36 Message-ID: <20121213185137.6345.61718.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 10:51:37 -0800 Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: [eman] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-04.txt X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 18:51:38 -0000 --NextPart A new Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Energy Management Working Group of the IETF. Title : Entity MIB (Version 4) Author(s) : A. Bierman, et al Filename : draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis Pages : 70 Date : Dec. 13, 2012 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes managed objects used for managing multiple logical and physical entities managed by a single SNMP agent. This document specifies version of the Entity MIB, which obsoletes version 3 [RFC4133]. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-04.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2012-12-13105137.I-D@ietf.org> --NextPart-- From moulchan@cisco.com Thu Dec 13 22:30:40 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D070821F881C for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 22:30:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7i1GXupBGMtl for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 22:30:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 058E721F881A for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2012 22:30:39 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1776; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1355466640; x=1356676240; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=+7eOWxjI2pMx+8lVLPmvEkX6FKsPR4ft2h56xQe3PgA=; b=hKAExrTgJBisNLrOqzA1JRgHRxsP9btOVfzuRjP2/f/O4A9eXdrSm8AL CQ/RgmPsz3nTqMHecwkNkAohBfeH0lc+Zad8n194C2lliHqQf3FMaO5w8 DXFYSyyhgpIYX403H7aqMHgMf/iTTR8j1EM8HsouZhtshWQMv4/VA976y E=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EAEXHylCtJV2d/2dsb2JhbABFvn8Wc4IeAQEBBB0dSwQCAQgRBAEBCxQJBzIUCQgCBBMIAQuHfwy9Q4xXG4NHYQOmUYJzgW01 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,279,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="152874190" Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 14 Dec 2012 06:30:32 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com [173.37.183.82]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qBE6UWRc017860 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 06:30:32 GMT Received: from xmb-rcd-x08.cisco.com ([169.254.8.240]) by xhc-rcd-x08.cisco.com ([173.37.183.82]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 00:30:32 -0600 From: "Mouli Chandramouli (moulchan)" To: "eman@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [eman] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-04.txt Thread-Index: AQHN2WdFeNnmADFcIkS17iIPrzVup5gXzj2A Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 06:30:31 +0000 Message-ID: <852AF0ED49D9F24BBBFA1B4DEEBE3BA42863D450@xmb-rcd-x08.cisco.com> References: <20121213185137.6345.61718.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20121213185137.6345.61718.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.142.100.90] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [eman] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-04.txt X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 06:30:40 -0000 Hello all,=20 We had a WG last call for this draft http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/e= man/current/msg01602.html Thanks for the comments from Juergen Schoenwaelder and those have been inco= rporated.=20 Section 4.3 contains an example on the use of the new MIB object.=20 WG Chairs, =20 Please advise us the next steps. =20 Thanks Dan, Mouli, Andy and Juergen=20 -----Original Message----- From: eman-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:eman-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Int= ernet-Drafts@ietf.org Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 12:22 AM To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: [eman] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-04.txt A new Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Energy Management Working Group of the IET= F. Title : Entity MIB (Version 4) Author(s) : A. Bierman, et al Filename : draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis Pages : 70=20 Date : Dec. 13, 2012=20 =20 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for us= e with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particul= ar, it describes managed objects used for managing multiple logical and phy= sical entities managed by a single SNMP agent. This document specifies vers= ion of the Entity MIB, which obsoletes version 3 [RFC4133]. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-04.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementa= tion to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. From internet-drafts@ietf.org Mon Dec 17 04:30:54 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CE8A21F85E4; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 04:30:54 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.534 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.534 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.065, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LMq9egsC1m3G; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 04:30:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CBD521F8785; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 04:30:54 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.36 Message-ID: <20121217123054.976.29056.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 04:30:54 -0800 Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: [eman] I-D Action: draft-ietf-eman-requirements-10.txt X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:30:54 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Energy Management Working Group of the IE= TF. Title : Requirements for Energy Management Author(s) : Juergen Quittek Mouli Chandramouli Rolf Winter Thomas Dietz Benoit Claise Filename : draft-ietf-eman-requirements-10.txt Pages : 26 Date : 2012-12-17 Abstract: This document defines requirements for standards specifications for energy management. The requirements defined in this document concern monitoring functions as well as control functions: Monitoring functions include identification of energy-managed devices and their components, monitoring of their power states, power inlets, power outlets, actual power, power properties, received energy, provided energy, and contained batteries. Control functions serve for controlling power supply and power state of energy-managed devices and their components. This document does not specify the features that must be implemented by compliant implementations but rather features that must be supported by standards for energy management. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-eman-requirements There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-eman-requirements-10 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-eman-requirements-10 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From Quittek@neclab.eu Mon Dec 17 04:40:59 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1020D21F8A69 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 04:40:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bAse3oqx5bdX for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 04:40:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu (mailer1.neclab.eu [195.37.70.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C118521F89D8 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 04:40:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 054F9102A75 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 13:40:50 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Amavisd on Debian GNU/Linux (netlab.nec.de) Received: from mailer1.neclab.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atlas-a.office.hd [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bDXMLxhiDX27 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 13:40:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from METHONE.office.hd (methone.office.hd [192.168.24.54]) by mailer1.neclab.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C619102A77 for ; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 13:40:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from PALLENE.office.hd ([169.254.1.222]) by METHONE.office.hd ([192.168.24.54]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 13:40:44 +0100 From: Juergen Quittek To: eman mailing list Thread-Topic: [eman] I-D Action: draft-ietf-eman-requirements-10.txt Thread-Index: AQHN3FOt5ACA0AiLJk+aKF8ycYRV3g== Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:40:22 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20121217123054.976.29056.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US Content-Language: de-DE X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.14.0.111121 x-originating-ip: [10.1.2.219] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [eman] I-D Action: draft-ietf-eman-requirements-10.txt X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:40:59 -0000 Dear all, This new version of the EMAN requirements considers the comments raised at WGLC. =20 Main changes are: Appendix: Deleted evaluation of other MIB modules. However, this text can be used in framework or MIB drafts. Requirement 7.6: Removed explicit requirement for a device to report Its proxy and capabilities of its proxy. Note: this does not mean we cannot have some of such functions in the MIB modules. =20 Terminology: Using term "device" instead of "entire entity". The authors think the the draft is ready for requesting publication (write-up). Thanks, Juergen On 17.12.12 13:30, "internet-drafts@ietf.org" wrote: > >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. > This draft is a work item of the Energy Management Working Group of the >IETF. > > Title : Requirements for Energy Management > Author(s) : Juergen Quittek > Mouli Chandramouli > Rolf Winter > Thomas Dietz > Benoit Claise > Filename : draft-ietf-eman-requirements-10.txt > Pages : 26 > Date : 2012-12-17 > >Abstract: > This document defines requirements for standards specifications for > energy management. The requirements defined in this document concern > monitoring functions as well as control functions: Monitoring > functions include identification of energy-managed devices and their > components, monitoring of their power states, power inlets, power > outlets, actual power, power properties, received energy, provided > energy, and contained batteries. Control functions serve for > controlling power supply and power state of energy-managed devices > and their components. > This document does not specify the features that must be implemented > by compliant implementations but rather features that must be > supported by standards for energy management. > > >The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-eman-requirements > >There's also a htmlized version available at: >http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-eman-requirements-10 > >A diff from the previous version is available at: >http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-eman-requirements-10 > > >Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: >ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > >_______________________________________________ >eman mailing list >eman@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eman From internet-drafts@ietf.org Tue Dec 18 10:17:23 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 45F0B21F8B14; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 10:17:23 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.529 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.529 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.070, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Zv5GddrGTBZc; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 10:17:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5A0C21F8B0D; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 10:17:22 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.37 Message-ID: <20121218181722.11411.91402.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 10:17:22 -0800 Cc: eman@ietf.org Subject: [eman] I-D Action: draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-05.txt X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 18:17:23 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Energy Management Working Group of the IE= TF. Title : Entity MIB (Version 4) Author(s) : Andy Bierman Dan Romascanu Juergen Quittek Mouli Chandramouli Filename : draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-05.txt Pages : 71 Date : 2012-12-18 Abstract: This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes managed objects used for managing multiple logical and physical entities managed by a single SNMP agent. This document specifies version of the Entity MIB, which obsoletes version 3 [RFC4133]. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-05 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-05 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz Tue Dec 18 13:57:26 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB23C21F88B7 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 13:57:26 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3hrSUOUEt1kx for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 13:57:25 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.auckland.ac.nz (mx2.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.12.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11CD321F88E6 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 13:57:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=auckland.ac.nz; i=n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz; q=dns/txt; s=uoa; t=1355867845; x=1387403845; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: content-transfer-encoding; bh=c1lmunCpVKi/hcDVphAwYjQwKxPJDEsR2dtBahn5W/g=; b=IwhK+zOoRVu9NDXUfI5+2YsTEO2OBiMGlVfrH3G4dwQRxxyhzfhSqV+W yoDtesQaBiMpAL7jTnA+TtrcCXdmpv/aCgxWpnOTMZaRXGFOLPJeuynd8 mWCanpJ3JJzdo/dwrZ0iVuy6BJjfEiWZbrwi0Bvfe0r0Expq3sm20w75E A=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,312,1355050800"; d="scan'208";a="162845062" X-Ironport-HAT: UNIVERSITY - $RELAY-THROTTLE X-Ironport-Source: 130.216.38.131 - Outgoing - Outgoing-SSL Received: from nevil-laptop1.sfac.auckland.ac.nz (HELO [130.216.38.131]) ([130.216.38.131]) by mx2-int.auckland.ac.nz with ESMTP; 19 Dec 2012 10:57:24 +1300 Message-ID: <50D0E6C4.4020105@auckland.ac.nz> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:57:24 +1300 From: Nevil Brownlee User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Benoit Claise Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ronald Bonica , "eman@ietf.org" Subject: [eman] IESG writeup for draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-05 X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 21:57:26 -0000 Hi Benoit and Ron: EMAN's Entity MIBv4 draft is now ready for submission to IESG, here is my Shepherd writeup for it ... Document: draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-05 Title: Entity MIB (Version 4) Editors: A. Bierman, D. Romascanu, J. Quittek, Mouli Chandramouli As required by RFC 4858, this is the current template for the Document Shepherd Write-Up. Changes are expected over time. This version is dated 24 February 2012. (1) What type of RFC is being requested (BCP, Proposed Standard, Internet Standard, Informational, Experimental, or Historic)? Why is this the proper type of RFC? Is this type of RFC indicated in the title page header? Standards Track. This draft is a MIB that obsoletes RFC 4133. Yes. (2) The IESG approval announcement includes a Document Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document Announcement Write-Up. Recent examples can be found in the "Action" announcements for approved documents. The approval announcement contains the following sections: Technical Summary: This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it describes managed objects used for managing multiple logical and physical entities managed by a single SNMP agent. This document specifies a new version of the Entity MIB, which obsoletes version 3 [RFC4133]. Working Group Summary: EMAN's meeting at IETF 83 (Paris) identified the need for this as a generic way to manage objects using a list of URIs. Mouli Chandramouli produced the -01 version in time for IETF 84, with co-editors Andy Bierman, Dan Romascanu and Juergen Quittek. The WG decided that this would provide a sensible base for the EMAN MIBs. Since then it has been discussed on the EMAN list; its WG Last Call was of its -03 version, from 11 to 29 October. The latest revision addresses concerns arising from the WGLC, the editors consider that it's now ready to publish. Document Quality: Are there existing implementations of the protocol? It obsoletes RFC 4133, Entity MIB v3. Have a significant number of vendors indicated their plan to implement the specification? Don't know. Are there any reviewers that merit special mention as having done a thorough review, e.g., one that resulted in important changes or a conclusion that the document had no substantive issues? Juergen Schoenwalder was particularly helpful as a reviewer at WGLC though the changes srising were minor. If there was a MIB Doctor, Media Type or other expert review, what was its course (briefly)? Two of the draft's editors are on the MIB Doctors list, so is Juergen Schoenwalder. Personnel: Who is the Document Shepherd? Who is the Responsible Area Director? Shepherd: Nevil Brownlee Area Director: Benoit Claise (3) Briefly describe the review of this document that was performed by the Document Shepherd. If this version of the document is not ready for publication, please explain why the document is being forwarded to the IESG. I have read the draft carefully, it has all the details needed for a MIB document, it clearly describes (section 2.16) the new features it implements, and explains why they should be useful to writers of new MIBs. The usage examples given in section 4 show clearly how this MIB can be used to describe routers, repeaters and a router with EMAN objects. I believe that this draft is ready to publish. (4) Does the document Shepherd have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? No. (5) Do portions of the document need review from a particular or from broader perspective, e.g., security, operational complexity, AAA, DNS, DHCP, XML, or internationalization? If so, describe the review that took place. No. (6) Describe any specific concerns or issues that the Document Shepherd has with this document that the Responsible Area Director and/or the IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps he or she is uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or has concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if the WG has discussed those issues and has indicated that it still wishes to advance the document, detail those concerns here. No issues of concern. (7) Has each author confirmed that any and all appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79 have already been filed. If not, explain why? This is a generic MIB, I don't believe it needs any IPR declaraions (it has none). Further, its editors are all well aware of IPR considerations. (8) Has an IPR disclosure been filed that references this document? If so, summarize any WG discussion and conclusion regarding the IPR disclosures. No, see (7) above. (9) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with it? There is strong consensus for this draft within the EMAN WG; many WG members have a strong interest in using this with the various EMAN MIBs (still in early draft versions). (10) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in separate email messages to the Responsible Area Director. (It should be in a separate email because this questionnaire is publicly available.) No. (11) Identify any ID nits the Document Shepherd has found in this document. (See http://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits/ and the Internet-Drafts Checklist). Boilerplate checks are not enough; this check needs to be thorough. I-D-nits errors found and fixed. Two obsolete references remain; RFC 2037 and RFC 2737 are needed - since RFC 2037 is ENTITY-MIB V1 and RFC 2737 is ENTITY-MIB V2 and they are explicitly mentioned in the draft. (12) Describe how the document meets any required formal review criteria, such as the MIB Doctor, media type, and URI type reviews. This is a MIB, two editors and one reviewer are MIB Doctors. (13) Have all references within this document been identified as either normative or informative? Yes. (14) Are there normative references to documents that are not ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? If such normative references exist, what is the plan for their completion? No, all references are already published. (15) Are there downward normative references references (see RFC 3967)? If so, list these downward references to support the Area Director in the Last Call procedure. No. (16) Will publication of this document change the status of any existing RFCs? Are those RFCs listed on the title page header, listed in the abstract, and discussed in the introduction? If the RFCs are not listed in the Abstract and Introduction, explain why, and point to the part of the document where the relationship of this document to the other RFCs is discussed. If this information is not in the document, explain why the WG considers it unnecessary. This draft obsoletes RFC 4133 (Entity MIBv3). That's clearly spelled out in its Abstract, near the top of its title page. (17) Describe the Document Shepherd's review of the IANA considerations section, especially with regard to its consistency with the body of the document. Confirm that all protocol extensions that the document makes are associated with the appropriate reservations in IANA registries. Confirm that any referenced IANA registries have been clearly identified. Confirm that newly created IANA registries include a detailed specification of the initial contents for the registry, that allocations procedures for future registrations are defined, and a reasonable name for the new registry has been suggested (see RFC 5226). This MIB uses { mib-2 47 }, entityMIB, no problems there. It adds a new entry to the list of IANA-maintained MIBs, see (18) below. (18) List any new IANA registries that require Expert Review for future allocations. Provide any public guidance that the IESG would find useful in selecting the IANA Experts for these new registries. It introduces a new IANA-maintained IANA-ENTITY-MIB module, which will allow for new physical classes to be added to the enumeration in IANAPhysicalClass. An Expert Review, as defined in RFC 5226 [RFC5226], is REQUIRED, for each modification. I suggest that IANA could simply send a request for a new IANAPhysicalClass to the MIB-doctors list, rather than designating one or two experts (?) (19) Describe reviews and automated checks performed by the Document Shepherd to validate sections of the document written in a formal language, such as XML code, BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc. I extracted the MIB from the draft by hand, then checked it using the SimpleWeb online MIB Checker. That gave a few warnings about the TEXTUAL CONVENTION definitions, but these look fine to me. Cheers, Nevil -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Nevil Brownlee Computer Science Department | ITS Phone: +64 9 373 7599 x88941 The University of Auckland FAX: +64 9 373 7453 Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand From j.schoenwaelder@jacobs-university.de Tue Dec 18 14:13:36 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFEAC21F8608 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 14:13:36 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -103.213 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.213 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.036, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aLX8KzCfACue for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 14:13:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de (hermes.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.23]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2749021F85B4 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 14:13:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.49]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0051220BD8; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 23:13:35 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at jacobs-university.de Received: from hermes.jacobs-university.de ([212.201.44.23]) by localhost (demetrius4.jacobs-university.de [212.201.44.32]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4O86RGq_G7ml; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 23:13:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from elstar.local (elstar.jacobs.jacobs-university.de [10.50.231.133]) by hermes.jacobs-university.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AC1B20BCD; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 23:13:34 +0100 (CET) Received: by elstar.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 239212382329; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 23:13:43 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 23:13:43 +0100 From: Juergen Schoenwaelder To: Nevil Brownlee Message-ID: <20121218221343.GA80603@elstar.local> Mail-Followup-To: Nevil Brownlee , Benoit Claise , Ronald Bonica , "eman@ietf.org" References: <50D0E6C4.4020105@auckland.ac.nz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50D0E6C4.4020105@auckland.ac.nz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: Ronald Bonica , "eman@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [eman] IESG writeup for draft-ietf-eman-rfc4133bis-05 X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Juergen Schoenwaelder List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 22:13:37 -0000 On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:57:24AM +1300, Nevil Brownlee wrote: > > > Juergen Schoenwalder was particularly helpful as a reviewer at WGLC > though the changes srising were minor. > > If there was a MIB Doctor, Media Type or other expert review, what was > its course (briefly)? > > Two of the draft's editors are on the MIB Doctors list, so is > Juergen Schoenwalder. > Note that I did _not_ do a complete MIB doctor review. I only reviewed the diffs; there might be consistency/terminology issues somewhere hidden in the old text which I did not review. /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 From n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz Tue Dec 18 20:21:27 2012 Return-Path: X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10B1B21E8042 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 20:21:24 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -106.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hlDSS3DThTQR for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 20:21:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx2.auckland.ac.nz (mx2.auckland.ac.nz [130.216.12.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 74ED321E803F for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 20:21:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=auckland.ac.nz; i=n.brownlee@auckland.ac.nz; q=dns/txt; s=uoa; t=1355890881; x=1387426881; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JwTOQPzbIdokH2PvG5iNi1CNvDlDAw8rg6juYQ2iZbg=; b=UWoE87Py2cNfh9YON78GQXtqtEKhR6afS/HksVgB9Jgspj/bxWWiatZ2 NXSntSCAswy4gQPauyu3Y6oU/iaBS9l5j0igRi5689/3N0NE/cFgb13UT G1lBuLkE1/wiBFHRVkmntwUZEcXqpiH9ZFHexf6/XegDAYddXGqhubxkd w=; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,313,1355050800"; d="scan'208";a="162931611" X-Ironport-HAT: UNIVERSITY - $RELAY-THROTTLE X-Ironport-Source: 130.216.38.131 - Outgoing - Outgoing-SSL Received: from nevil-laptop1.sfac.auckland.ac.nz (HELO [130.216.38.131]) ([130.216.38.131]) by mx2-int.auckland.ac.nz with ESMTP; 19 Dec 2012 17:21:19 +1300 Message-ID: <50D140BE.40702@auckland.ac.nz> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 17:21:18 +1300 From: Nevil Brownlee User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ronald Bonica References: <50D0E6C4.4020105@auckland.ac.nz> In-Reply-To: <50D0E6C4.4020105@auckland.ac.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: draft-ietf-eman-requirements@tools.ietf.org, "eman@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [eman] IESG writeup for draft-ietf-eman-requirements-10 X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 04:21:28 -0000 Hi Ron: EMAN's Requirements draft is now ready for submission to IESG, here is my Shepherd writeup for it ... Document: draft-ietf-eman-requirements-10 Title: Requirements for Energy Management Editors: J. Quittek, M. Chandramouli, R. Winter, T. Dietz, B. Claise As required by RFC 4858, this is the current template for the Document Shepherd Write-Up. Changes are expected over time. This version is dated 24 February 2012. (1) What type of RFC is being requested (BCP, Proposed Standard, Internet Standard, Informational, Experimental, or Historic)? Why is this the proper type of RFC? Is this type of RFC indicated in the title page header? Informational. This is the EMAN Requirements draft, defining what an energy management system does, it will be followed up by the EMAN Framework draft. Yes. (2) The IESG approval announcement includes a Document Announcement Write-Up. Please provide such a Document Announcement Write-Up. Recent examples can be found in the "Action" announcements for approved documents. The approval announcement contains the following sections: Technical Summary: This document defines requirements for standards specifications for energy management. These concern monitoring functions as well as control functions: Monitoring functions include identification of energy-managed devices and their components, monitoring of their power states, power inlets, power outlets, actual power, power properties, received energy, provided energy, and contained batteries. Control functions serve for controlling power supply and power state of energy-managed devices and their components. Working Group Summary: Version -08 of this draft was presented in the EMAN session at IETF 84 (Vancouver). The authors published -09, resolving the open issues discussed at that meeting. The draft's Working Group Last Call ran from 4 October to 22 October this year, and raised several more issues. After IETF-85, the authors published its -10 version; we believe it is now ready to submit to IESG. Document Quality: Are there existing implementations of the protocol? This is a requirements draft, not a protocol. Have a significant number of vendors indicated their plan to implement the specification? At least two vendors have implemented Energy Management systems, and - presumably - will make them EMAN-compliant. Are there any reviewers that merit special mention as having done a thorough review, e.g., one that resulted in important changes or a conclusion that the document had no substantive issues? Since September the following have contributed comments on the EMAN list: Ira McDonald, John Parello, Brad Schoening, Georgios Karagian. However, the draft's authors/editors have done most of the work in developing it. If there was a MIB Doctor, Media Type or other expert review, what was its course (briefly)? The draft hasn't had any kind of expert review. Personnel: Who is the Document Shepherd? Who is the Responsible Area Director? Shepherd: Nevil Brownlee Area Director: Ron Bonica (3) Briefly describe the review of this document that was performed by the Document Shepherd. If this version of the document is not ready for publication, please explain why the document is being forwarded to the IESG. I have read the draft carefully, it explains what 'energy management' means in a networked environment, what goals an energy management system needs to achieve, and how managed entities in such a system are expected to behave. I believe the draft is ready for IESG submission. (4) Does the document Shepherd have any concerns about the depth or breadth of the reviews that have been performed? No. (5) Do portions of the document need review from a particular or from broader perspective, e.g., security, operational complexity, AAA, DNS, DHCP, XML, or internationalization? If so, describe the review that took place. No. (6) Describe any specific concerns or issues that the Document Shepherd has with this document that the Responsible Area Director and/or the IESG should be aware of? For example, perhaps he or she is uncomfortable with certain parts of the document, or has concerns whether there really is a need for it. In any event, if the WG has discussed those issues and has indicated that it still wishes to advance the document, detail those concerns here. No issues of concern. (7) Has each author confirmed that any and all appropriate IPR disclosures required for full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79 have already been filed. If not, explain why? This is a typical Requirements draft, I don't believe it needs any IPR declarations (it has none). Further, its editors are all well aware of IPR considerations. (8) Has an IPR disclosure been filed that references this document? If so, summarize any WG discussion and conclusion regarding the IPR disclosures. No, see (7) above. (9) How solid is the WG consensus behind this document? Does it represent the strong concurrence of a few individuals, with others being silent, or does the WG as a whole understand and agree with it? There is strong consensus for this draft within the EMAN WG. (10) Has anyone threatened an appeal or otherwise indicated extreme discontent? If so, please summarise the areas of conflict in separate email messages to the Responsible Area Director. (It should be in a separate email because this questionnaire is publicly available.) No. (11) Identify any ID nits the Document Shepherd has found in this document. (See http://www.ietf.org/tools/idnits/ and the Internet-Drafts Checklist). Boilerplate checks are not enough; this check needs to be thorough. I-D-nits checker says "No nits found." (12) Describe how the document meets any required formal review criteria, such as the MIB Doctor, media type, and URI type reviews. This draft has no sections of this kind. (13) Have all references within this document been identified as either normative or informative? Yes. All its references are Informative; it will become a Normative reference for EMAN's three MIB drafts. (14) Are there normative references to documents that are not ready for advancement or are otherwise in an unclear state? If such normative references exist, what is the plan for their completion? No. One Informative reference is to an unpublished EMAN draft. (15) Are there downward normative references references (see RFC 3967)? If so, list these downward references to support the Area Director in the Last Call procedure. No. (16) Will publication of this document change the status of any existny programing RFCs? Are those RFCs listed on the title page header, listed in the abstract, and discussed in the introduction? If the RFCs are not listed in the Abstract and Introduction, explain why, and point to the part of the document where the relationship of this document to the other RFCs is discussed. If this information is not in the document, explain why the WG considers it unnecessary. No. (17) Describe the Document Shepherd's review of the IANA considerations section, especially with regard to its consistency with the body of the document. Confirm that all protocol extensions that the document makes are associated with the appropriate reservations in IANA registries. Confirm that any referenced IANA registries have been clearly identified. Confirm that newly created IANA registries include a detailed specification of the initial contents for the registry, that allocations procedures for future registrations are defined, and a reasonable name for the new registry has been suggested (see RFC 5226). It has no IANA Considerations. (18) List any new IANA registries that require Expert Review for future allocations. Provide any public guidance that the IESG would find useful in selecting the IANA Experts for these new registries. It has no IANA Considerations. (19) Describe reviews and automated checks performed by the Document Shepherd to validate sections of the document written in a formal language, such as XML code, BNF rules, MIB definitions, etc. No part of this draft is in any formal language. Cheers, Nevil -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Nevil Brownlee Computer Science Department | ITS Phone: +64 9 373 7599 x88941 The University of Auckland FAX: +64 9 373 7453 Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand