Re: AT MIBS--NBP fields r/w??
"Ritter, Mike" <MWRITTER@applelink.apple.com> Thu, 24 June 1993 17:42 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10445; 24 Jun 93 13:42 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10441; 24 Jun 93 13:42 EDT
Received: from cayman.cayman.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa19670; 24 Jun 93 13:42 EDT
Received: by cayman.Cayman.COM (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA05424; Thu, 24 Jun 93 12:43:47 EDT
Return-Path: <MWRITTER@AppleLink.Apple.COM>
Received: from guardian.apple.com by cayman.Cayman.COM (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA05420; Thu, 24 Jun 93 12:43:43 EDT
Received: from [90.1.0.8] by guardian.apple.com with SMTP (5.65/22-Jun-1993-eef) id AA25702; Thu, 24 Jun 93 09:40:15 -0700 for
Received: by alink-gw.apple.com (921113.SGI.UNSUPPORTED_PROTOTYPE/28-May-1993-eef) id AA28823; Thu, 24 Jun 93 09:38:44 -0700 for APPLE-IP@CAYMAN.COM
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1993 16:27:00 +0000
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: "Ritter, Mike" <MWRITTER@applelink.apple.com>
Subject: Re: AT MIBS--NBP fields r/w??
To: APPLE-IP@cayman.com
Message-Id: <740939924.3506377@AppleLink.Apple.COM>
This is not any of Apple's products. Writing to these values is not possible using the current stack. It would also take a major rewrite of the current interfaces/implementation to enable it. Maybe you could leave the interfaces alone and really hack the stack...nah. how do you tell some process that there NBP name has changed? We decided that support of the writability wasn't possible without way too much work for the payoff. As to why we set the fields r/w I don't have a clue. -Mike ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- In RFC1243 and the AppleTalk MIB II, why did we set the fields of the nbpTable, and particularly object, type, and zone, as read-write?? Did anyone ever actually implement this?!?
- AT MIBS--NBP fields r/w?? Wayne F. Tackabury
- Re: AT MIBS--NBP fields r/w?? Ritter, Mike