Re: [Agentx] Empty context in rfc2742
"Randy Presuhn" <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com> Tue, 01 September 2009 19:15 UTC
Return-Path: <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
X-Original-To: agentx@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: agentx@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D06F228C72C for <agentx@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Sep 2009 12:15:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.663
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.663 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.256, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=0.992, J_CHICKENPOX_15=0.6, J_CHICKENPOX_17=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yMhOamHZW4WM for <agentx@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Sep 2009 12:15:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net (elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net [209.86.89.69]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED0413A6C71 for <agentx@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Sep 2009 12:15:12 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=mindspring.com; b=py4ZKcYi6igd8/AUWF2TXt1yVA4wLWqoFj/Qp2wN1e8ay7d2x5rB0Is/vX4KDlmO; h=Received:Message-ID:From:To:References:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Received: from [99.41.51.212] (helo=oemcomputer) by elasmtp-mealy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>) id 1MiYdY-0005og-0F for agentx@ietf.org; Tue, 01 Sep 2009 15:03:24 -0400
Message-ID: <007801ca2a6e$2bc23f00$6801a8c0@oemcomputer>
From: Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@mindspring.com>
To: agentx@ietf.org
References: <1251623843.6043.6.camel@sara.home><8a0268750908301048i2b4a477dod97e582238098bbe@mail.gmail.com><1251668476.3736.14.camel@sara.home><8a0268750908301523o390d9ff1kc951bfb24d49c9e1@mail.gmail.com> <1251750777.5149.52.camel@sara.home>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 12:06:38 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1478
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1478
X-ELNK-Trace: 4488c18417c9426da92b9037bc8bcf44d4c20f6b8d69d8881afdcb5313ff34f9a7e9e1b187221c911018c22155847ecf350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 99.41.51.212
Subject: Re: [Agentx] Empty context in rfc2742
X-BeenThere: agentx@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: SNMP Agent Extensibility <agentx.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/agentx>, <mailto:agentx-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/agentx>
List-Post: <mailto:agentx@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:agentx-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/agentx>, <mailto:agentx-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:15:39 -0000
Hi - > From: "Magnus Fromreide" <magfr@lysator.liu.se> > To: "Mark Ellison" <ellison@ieee.org> > Cc: <agentx@ietf.org> > Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 1:32 PM > Subject: Re: [Agentx] Empty context in rfc2742 ... > While this is true it is also true that the agent is free to map the > AgentX-contexts to SNMP-contexts however it wish so I think this impose > no limits on the values of AgentX-contexts. This would be an incredibly bad idea. Perhaps section 6.1.1 of RFC 2741 could be more explicit, but to my knowledge no one has ever come to a different conclusion in deciding how to implement this. Furthermore, 6.1.1 of RFC 2741 says: If the NON_DEFAULT_CONTEXT bit in the AgentX header field h.flags is clear, then there is no context field in the PDU, and the operation refers to the default context. (This does not mean there is a zero- length Octet String, it means there is no Octet String present.) If the NON_DEFAULT_CONTEXT bit is set, then a context field immediately follows the AgentX header, and the operation refers to that specific context. The context is represented as an Octet String. There are no constraints on its length or contents. What does this mean? It means that there happen to be two ways to encode the default context. (1) set the NON_DEFAULT_CONTEXT bit to 0, and omit the context field which would otherwise immediately follow. (2) set the NON_DEFAULT_CONTEXT bit to 1, and follow it with the properly encoded zero-length string. Obviously, (2) is not encouraged, since (1) provides a more efficient encoding and we all know how parsimonious AgentX encodings are. :-) > This question is only regarding the _values_ of the agentxRegContext > column. > > As I said above it believe that agentxRegContext should represent the > values of the AgentX-context for all AgentX-registrations that is made > on the AgentX-side of the master agent. > > The problem is that the value set for AgentX-context contains one > element more than the value set for OCTET STRING. No, it doesn't. It merely provides two ways of encoding the zero-length string, used to represent the default context. > I am asking how the AgentX-context value that don't fit into the mapping > from AgentX-context to agentxRegContext should be handled. > > EXAMPLE: > > Assume that two AgentX registrations are made to a master agent that > implements rfc 2741 and rfc 2742. > > 1: { r.flags = 0, <no r.context>, ... } > 2: { r.flags = NON_DEFAULT_CONTEXT, r.context = "", ... } > > Now as I read 2742 the value of the agentxRegContext column for > registration #1 is "" > > The question is what the value of the agentxRegContext column for > registration #2 should be? Exactly the same. These are two attempts to register for the same context. I seem to recall a long-ago discussion about whether the latter should be treated as a protocol error. I don't recall the outcome of that discussion. As an implementor, my inclination would be to accept it, but never generate it. Randy
- [Agentx] Empty context in rfc2742 Magnus Fromreide
- Re: [Agentx] Empty context in rfc2742 Mark Ellison
- Re: [Agentx] Empty context in rfc2742 Magnus Fromreide
- Re: [Agentx] Empty context in rfc2742 Mark Ellison
- Re: [Agentx] Empty context in rfc2742 Magnus Fromreide
- Re: [Agentx] Empty context in rfc2742 Mark Ellison
- Re: [Agentx] Empty context in rfc2742 Randy Presuhn
- Re: [Agentx] Empty context in rfc2742 Magnus Fromreide