IETF 49, ADSL MIB WG 
Mike Sneed, Chair, Dave Allan, co-chair-scribe 

Agenda bashing 

Document Status 
- supplementary objects draft is awaiting AD review. 

DSL Forum Liaison 
        - liaison letter needs to be posted to the list. 
        - Forum had a preview of some of the work done on VDSL by Bob Ray et al.
        - DSLF would like to pull together ETSI, ANSI, ITU and FSAN to pull together some requirements to feed into the IETF. 
- comments on the current internet draft. Mainly to do with G.992.1 annex H and annex C. Add an enumerated value to cover annex H and remove Annex C. 

Q: (Mike): is it worth pulling this thing out of the queue to get this addressed. 
A: No, (Rajeesh) issue is that the Japanese market is not covered. It clearly does belong in there. 
Q: (Randy) This suggests that there will be on-going problems with this object and it is probably worth fixing now. There are examples of this sort of thing getting fixed without slowing down the work. 
A: this can be done in a separate document and made to be IANA maintained. 
A: (Bert) this should be OK as it is not a semantic change. If we agree that adding a few values to an enumeration is not a semantic change, then we do not need to recycle this document in the process. 

        Conclusion: It makes sense to fix it now, question is how, it is in the reviewers queue. 
        Bert: Get consensus on the list and send Bert the result and he will incorporate it into his review comments. 

HDSL2/SHDSL draft 06 update (Bob Ray) 

        -Major revision following Pittsburgh. Incorporated Rajeesh's suggestion of a span table. 
        -Big change is maintenance table into two tables, endpoint and unit specific. 
        -A couple of SMIv2 compliance items. 
        - vendor ID changed to a string of size 9. 
        - text on how to deal with over or undercount of repeaters. 
        DSLF changes to the annex C enum addressed. 
        Mike: Security considerations needs verbage. 
        With these changes we should be ready for WG last call. 
        Noted that version -6 has a vacuous security section. 
Q: Is the assumption that only providers ever get access to this stuff. If the customer has access, then you have security problems. Also issues with consistency of IF-INDEX across re-boots.

Issue is configuring a view, which puts an index in the view table. This means that the indexes in the view table need to be consistent. Established that this a non issue. 

Security section should capture this specific caveat. 

Question: In the document at the top of page 30 there is a reference to an experimental value not handed out by IANA. This needs to be addressed and the document needs to make this clear. 
        Value filled in when the document gets published as an RFC. The RFC editor takes care of this. 
        Recommendation is to get an experimental one now. Mike will request a number. 

VDSL MIB 
        Mike: The important thing is to get agreement on a charter change and getting a timetable fixed. 
This will be driven partially by DSLF. Need to avoid line code issues and attack the generic space. 
For the AD's benefit, there is a lot of interest in working on this, no shortage of bodies. 
We'll put something together on the list. 

Path forward 
        Reviewed quickly. 
        Q: Can we drop the 'A" and become the DSL MIB WG. Bert thinks he could probably sell DSL MIB.