RE: [802.1 - 1083] FW: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity Fault Management MIB
"Alex Rozin" <arozin@mrv.com> Sun, 19 November 2006 10:41 UTC
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Glk7U-0007kM-1t; Sun, 19 Nov 2006 05:41:52 -0500
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Glk7S-0007dy-Oy; Sun, 19 Nov 2006 05:41:50 -0500
Received: from mx2.lb.mrv.com ([66.43.110.200] helo=chmailqsrv.int.mrv.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Glk7N-0001IK-CC; Sun, 19 Nov 2006 05:41:50 -0500
Received: from chmailqsrv.int.mrv.com (127.0.0.1) by chmailqsrv.int.mrv.com (MlfMTA v3.2r1b3) id hc0q500171sp; Sun, 19 Nov 2006 02:38:57 -0800 (envelope-from <arozin@mrv.com>)
Received: from chmailsrv.int.mrv.com ([192.168.11.19]) by chmailqsrv.int.mrv.com (SonicWALL 5.0.0.8239) with ESMTP; Sun, 19 Nov 2006 02:38:57 -0800
Received: from zeus.yok.int.mrv.com ([172.21.9.11]) by chmailsrv.int.mrv.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sun, 19 Nov 2006 02:41:29 -0800
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: RE: [802.1 - 1083] FW: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity Fault Management MIB
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2006 12:41:26 +0200
Message-ID: <685D66DF6DB563459D23ECD8B30C73A4431E3E@zeus.yok.int.mrv.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: Summary of 802.1ag discussion
Thread-Index: AccJxQRds/dGFCGJSoGi0NfdCWHP/AB69qhQ
From: Alex Rozin <arozin@mrv.com>
To: "Norman Finn (nfinn)" <nfinn@CISCO.COM>, STDS-802-1-L@listserv.ieee.org, "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>, MIB Doctors <mib-doctors@ietf.org>, "Bridge-Mib (E-mail)" <bridge-mib@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Nov 2006 10:41:29.0518 (UTC) FILETIME=[45771CE0:01C70BC7]
X-Mlf-Version: 5.0.0.8239
X-Mlf-UniqueId: o200611191038560057592
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 02ec665d00de228c50c93ed6b5e4fc1a
Cc:
X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Bridge MIB <bridge-mib.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib>, <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:bridge-mib@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib>, <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bridge-mib-bounces@ietf.org
Please provide clarifications for the IEEE8021-CFM-MIB in .1ag: 1. Norman Finn wrote: > 4. The Stack Table will be revised to have the interface number, MD > Level, VLAN ID or zero, and direction as inputs, and produce > Maintenance Domain index, MA index, MEPID (or 0 for MIPs) as outputs. To my understanding, there cannot be more that one Maintenance Domains with the same MD Level on a single Bridge. Am I right? 2. Providing a single Bridge cannot have more than one Maintenance Domain with the same MD Level, then can you index the table dot1agCfmMdTable by dot1agCfmMdLevel? In this case you don't need additional arbitrary integer index dot1agCfmMdIndex neither dot1agCfmMdTableNextIndex. I offer to replace dot1agCfmMdIndex by dot1agCfmMdLevel in all relevant tables, for example in dot1agCfmMaTable. 3. Now let's consider dot1agCfmMaTable. If the first index of this table is dot1agCfmMdLevel, then you could use the pair {dot1agCfmMaFormat, dot1agCfmMaName} as a second and third indexes: maximum length of index would be 1+1+1+45=48, not so VERY long OIDs. Note that, for example, in DISMAN-PING-MIB (http://www.simpleweb.org/ietf/mibs/modules/IETF/txt/DISMAN-PING-MIB) maximum index in pingCtlTable is 1+32+1+32=66. So, the MIB would not need complex, unnatural objects dot1agCfmMdTableNextIndex and dot1agCfmMaTableNextIndex neither type Dot1afCfmIndexIntegerNextFree; referential integrity of tables would be provided automatically, issues of the index reusage, increasing and wrapping around. 4. The natural demands should be formulated: a) When an entry in the dot1agCfmMdTable is deleted, all relevant entries in dot1agCfmMaTable must be deleted as well, and b) When an entry in the dot1agCfmMaTable is deleted, all relevant entries in dot1agCfmMepTable (etc.) must be deleted. 5. If the WG continue to use the arbitrary integer index dot1agCfmMdIndex with different ranges for associated and not-associated, then instead of a single object dot1agCfmMaTableNextIndex two objects must be defined, one per a such range, let us say: dot1agCfmMaTableVlanedNextIndex (0, 1..4094) and dot1agCfmMaTableNonVlanedNextIndex (0, 16777217..4294967295). And what is more, why second indexes in dot1agCfmMaEntry cannot be repeated inside different domains? In other words object dot1agCfmMaTableNextIndex should be per MD. Thanks, Alex _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib
- [Bridge-mib] Connectivity Fault Management MIB Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- RE: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity Fault Management MIB Alex Rozin
- RE: [802.1 - 1083] FW: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity … Wijnen, Bert (Bert)
- RE: [802.1 - 1083] FW: [Bridge-mib] Connectivity … Alex Rozin