Re: [ANCP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-ancp-mib-an-11

[Tom Taylor <[e-mail]>]

Stefaan actually answered the question I intended. Essentially, the 
answer is that walking the whole table is no big deal because it won't 
be that large. Thanks, aand consider the matter cleared.

tom

On 29/10/2013 11:15 AM, Moti Morgenstern wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The question, if I understand it correctly, assumes that the ancpAnSessionUp notification reports the ancpAnCurrentSessionAnInstance only as a value (which means the management system does not know what session ID is involved).
> However, in SNMP each object (Variable Binding) in the PDU (no matter if that is a SET/GET message of a notification message) is actually more than just a value.
>
> Actually, each Variable Binding consists of 4 pieces of information:
> (1) The length of the Variable Binding instance in bytes [should the destination wish to jump over that Variable Binding block].
> (2) The full OID of the Variable Binding instance (i.e., which means you got the ancpAnSessionConfigSessionId value embedded here)
> (3) The value type
> (4) The value
>
> I hope that this clears the question.
>
> Regards,
> Moti
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DE CNODDER, STEFAAN (STEFAAN) [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 3:30 PM
> To: Moti Morgenstern
> Subject: FW: [ANCP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-ancp-mib-an-11
>
> Hi Moti,
>
> Do you have an answer for the question below?  Scanning the whole table does not look a big problem to me because I do not expect that many ANCP sessions in an AN, but still the question looks relevant for me if there is such a method to directly access the right row.
>
> Regards,
> Stefaan
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wojciech Dec (wdec) [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: maandag 28 oktober 2013 15:05
> To: [e-mail]
> Cc: [e-mail]; Tom Taylor
> Subject: Re: [ANCP] Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-ancp-mib-an-11
>
> Hi MIB-draft authors,
>
> Could you kindly reply to Tom's comments/questions. We can then close the last call.
>
> Regards,
> Wojciech.
>
>
>
> On 19/09/2013 13:52, "Tom Taylor" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>> On 05/09/2013 7:58 AM, Wojciech Dec (wdec) wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Starting from today we would like to initiate a week Working Group
>>> Last Call for the following draft:
>>>
>>> Access Node Control Protocol (ANCP) MIB module for Access Nodes
>>>
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ancp-mib-an-11
>>>
>>> Accordingly, please review these documents and bring any remaining
>>> issues, or issues whose resolution is not satisfactory, to the
>>> attention of the Working Group on this list and/or by using the issue
>>> tracker tool.
>>>
>>> Please note that both of these parts has recently been substantially
>>> rewritten by Roy, just as I rewrote p6 a while back. As such, we're
>>> treating those changes as a proposal from the editors to the Working
>>> Group, to be confirmed. Please review carefully with this in mind.
>>>
>>> To give people ample time to review, we'll have a 3-week WGLC, ending
>>> on September 27.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Wojciech and Matthew.
>>>
>>
>> I have reviewed the latest version of this document. There are a couple
>> instances of non-native English syntax, but not enough to worry about.
>> In general the document looks good to go.
>>
>> I have one question regarding the ancpAnSessionUp notification. The
>> index to the session tables is ancpAnSessionConfigSessionId. How, then,
>> does one retrieve the data associated with the
>> ancpAnCurrentSessionAnInstance, which is buried in the
>> ancpAnCurrentSessionTabl? Is it necessary to walk the complete
>> ancpAnCurrentSessionTable (well, on the average, half the table)
>> applying a filter?
>
>
>
> This e-mail message is intended for the recipient only and contains information which is CONFIDENTIAL and which may be proprietary to ECI Telecom. If you have received this transmission in error, please inform us by e-mail, phone or fax, and then delete the original and all copies thereof.
>
>