RE: [Bridge-mib] VLAN-ID

"Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com> Wed, 19 February 2003 18:52 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [132.151.1.19] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04771 for <bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 13:52:14 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h1JIwQq01490 for bridge-archive@odin.ietf.org; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 13:58:26 -0500
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h1JIw7p01482; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 13:58:07 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h1JIvsp01460 for <bridge-mib@optimus.ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 13:57:54 -0500
Received: from ierw.net.avaya.com (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA04731 for <bridge-mib@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 13:51:10 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ierw.net.avaya.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ierw.net.avaya.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA10431 for <bridge-mib@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 13:52:24 -0500 (EST)
Received: from IS0004AVEXU1.global.avaya.com (h135-64-105-51.avaya.com [135.64.105.51]) by ierw.net.avaya.com (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA10408 for <bridge-mib@ietf.org>; Wed, 19 Feb 2003 13:52:23 -0500 (EST)
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6375.0
content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] VLAN-ID
Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2003 20:54:55 +0200
Message-ID: <AAB4B3D3CF0F454F98272CBE187FDE2F03009B37@is0004avexu1.global.avaya.com>
Thread-Topic: [Bridge-mib] VLAN-ID
Thread-Index: AcLYKxCISBVXf79LTvqvcrYKTJivQwAEg3SgAAJPHWAAAHflIA==
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: Eduardo Cardona <e.cardona@CableLabs.com>, "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>, bridge-mib@ietf.org
Cc: mibs@ops.ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by www1.ietf.org id h1JIvsp01461
Sender: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: bridge-mib-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib>, <mailto:bridge-mib-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <bridge-mib.ietf.org>
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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

That's a similar semantics with the one in the framework PIB. They just picked -1 as their special semantics value, while DOCSIS picked zero. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eduardo Cardona [mailto:e.cardona@CableLabs.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 8:52 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Wijnen, Bert (Bert); bridge-mib@ietf.org
> Cc: mibs@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] VLAN-ID
> 
> 
> Dan, Bert, 
> 
> DOCSIS uses the Vlan Mask in a packet classification scheme where the
> value zero means the VLAN-ID is not analyzed to match the 
> tagged packet.
> 
> As operations, The Vlan value is set in the CM config file, 
> if not used
> in the config file, a default value of zero means don't care 
> 
> For the DOCS-QOS-MIB 
> Would be possible to subtype the VlanId TC as 
> 
> docsQosPktClassVlanId OBJECT-TYPE
> SYNTAX VlanId INTEGER (0..4094)
> Or 
> SYNTAX VlanId INTEGER (0 | 1..4094)
> .....
> 
> Or a new TC zeroOrVlanId
> With ;
> SYNTAX INTEGER (0 | 1..4094)
> 
> 
> 
> Eduardo
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 10:57 AM
> To: Wijnen, Bert (Bert); bridge-mib@ietf.org
> Cc: mibs@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Bridge-mib] VLAN-ID
> 
> 
> Bert,
> 
> I suggest to take the discussion to the mibs list. The interest is
> broader than Bridge MIB, as demonstrated by the number of 
> MIBs that deal
> with VLAN ID objects.
> 
> To the point: 
> - It looks that definitions in 
> draft-ietf-bridge-ext-v2-01.txt, RFC 2613
> and RFC 2674 (VlanId) are similar. A common TC can be easily 
> defined, by
> taking the RFC 2674 VlanId TC and adding the REFERENCE as in 
> RFC 2613. 
> - I do not know what is the reason DOCSIS supports value 0. 
> - The framework PIB have added a special value -1, with a separate
> semantics (ignore VLAN in the filter). 
> - VlanIndex in RFC2674 also has a different semantics. 
> 
> Side issue -  if a TC can be easily written and agreed (after some cat
> beating) - what will we be doing with documents already on 
> the standards
> track? RFC 2613 is supposed to be advanced from PS to DS 'as is'. You
> can buy a beer to the author and have a new document issued, but will
> such a change prevent advancement of the document on the 
> standard track?
> If yes, is this really worth?
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2003 5:14 PM
> > To: bridge-mib@ietf.org
> > Subject: [Bridge-mib] VLAN-ID
> > 
> > 
> > Bridgemibbers....
> > 
> > I do not see much (if any activity lately) :-(
> > 
> > But I have a question.
> > 
> > I see a VLAN ID represented in various forms:
> > 
> > - draft-ietf-bridge-ext-v2-01.txt
> >     VlanId ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
> >        STATUS      current
> >        DESCRIPTION "A 12-bit VLAN ID used in the VLAN Tag header."
> >        SYNTAX      INTEGER (1..4094)
> > - somehwere I found:
> >     dot1vProtocolPortGroupVid OBJECT-TYPE
> >        SYNTAX      INTEGER (1..4094)
> >        MAX-ACCESS  read-create
> >        STATUS      current
> >        DESCRIPTION "The VID associated with a group of protocols for
> >                     each port."
> >        REFERENCE   "IEEE 802.1v clause 8.4.4, 12.10.1.2"
> > 
> > - In a DOCSIS document I find:
> >     docsQosPktClassVlanId OBJECT-TYPE
> >        SYNTAX          Integer32 (0..4095)
> >        MAX-ACCESS      read-only
> >        STATUS          current
> > 
> > - In the framework PIB (draft-ietf-rap-frameworkpib-09.txt) I find:
> > 
> >   frwk802FilterVlanId OBJECT-TYPE
> >       SYNTAX         Integer32 (-1 | 1..4094)
> >       STATUS         current
> >       DESCRIPTION
> >           "The VLAN ID (VID) that uniquely identifies a VLAN
> >           within the device. This VLAN may be known or unknown
> >           (i.e., traffic associated with this VID has not yet
> >           been seen by the device) at the time this entry
> >           is instantiated.
> > 
> >           Setting the frwk802FilterVlanId object to -1 
> indicates that
> >           VLAN data should not be considered during traffic
> >           classification."
> > 
> > - In rfc2613 I find:
> >    smonVlanIdStatsId OBJECT-TYPE
> >     SYNTAX     Integer32 (1..4094)
> >     MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
> >     STATUS     current
> >     DESCRIPTION
> >         "The unique identifier of the VLAN monitored for
> >          this specific statistics collection.
> > 
> >         Tagged packets match the VID for the range between 
> 1 and 4094.
> >         An external RMON probe MAY detect VID=0 on an Inter Switch
> >         Link, in which case the packet belongs to a VLAN 
> determined by
> >         the PVID of the ingress port. The VLAN to which 
> such a packet
> >         belongs can be determined only by a RMON probe 
> internal to the
> >         switch."
> >     REFERENCE
> >         "Draft Standard for Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks,
> >           P802.1Q/D10, chapter 3.13"
> > 
> > - In RFC2674 I find:
> >   VlanIndex ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
> >     STATUS      current
> >     DESCRIPTION
> >         "A value used to index per-VLAN tables: values of 0 and
> >         4095 are not permitted; if the value is between 1 and
> >         4094 inclusive, it represents an IEEE 802.1Q VLAN-ID with
> >         global scope within a given bridged domain (see VlanId
> >         textual convention).  If the value is greater than 4095
> >         then it represents a VLAN with scope local to the
> >         particular agent, i.e. one without a global VLAN-ID
> >         assigned to it. Such VLANs are outside the scope of
> >         IEEE 802.1Q but it is convenient to be able to manage them
> >         in the same way using this MIB."
> >     SYNTAX      Unsigned32
> > 
> > - IN RFC2674 I also find
> >    VlanId ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
> >       STATUS      current
> >       DESCRIPTION
> >           "A 12-bit VLAN ID used in the VLAN Tag header."
> >       SYNTAX      INTEGER (1..4094)
> > 
> > Not sure I found all occurances.
> > 
> > So my question is: what is the CORRECT spec, and could we try to 
> > define one (or a few)  TC(s) that everyone else can IMPORT and use.
> > 
> > Bert
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bridge-mib mailing list
> > Bridge-mib@ietf.org 
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib
> 

_______________________________________________
Bridge-mib mailing list
Bridge-mib@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib