Re: What is a Slot/FRU/PhysDevice?

David Arneson <> Tue, 11 August 1992 18:01 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-chassismib>
Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA16304; Tue, 11 Aug 92 14:01:34 -0400
Received: from by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA16300; Tue, 11 Aug 92 14:01:28 -0400
Received: from [] by id aa01474; 11 Aug 92 14:01 EDT
Received: from cardinals.ctron by (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA29319; Tue, 11 Aug 92 13:59:49 EDT
Received: from yeti.ctron by cardinals.ctron (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA24394; Tue, 11 Aug 92 13:59:52 EDT
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 13:59:52 EDT
From: David Arneson <>
Message-Id: <9208111759.AA24394@cardinals.ctron>
Subject: Re: What is a Slot/FRU/PhysDevice?

> From: (Jason Perreault)
> I haven't attended the last two IETFs, and from the minutes I
> can't determine whether these issues have been raised, so....
> I'm wondering whether a distinction needs to be made between
> "physical device" and "slot", and whether the concept of
> field-replaceable unit (FRU) needs to be introduced. While the
> most common interrelationship among physDev-FRU-slot might be
> 1-1-1, two other cases probably are common enough to warrant 
> some manner of treatment in the MIB:
<Much deleted>
>    To what level of detail ought the MIB seek to represent the
>    physical composition of the chassis?
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Jason Perreault           net   :
> Coral Network Corp        voice : (508) 460-6010 x228
> Marlborough MA 01752      fax   : (508) 481-6258
My feeling is that the chassis MIB is the incorrect spot for FRU
information.  I think the major problem is the definition of FRU
differs greatly from vendor to vendor.  I think the IETF would be
forever trying to agree on what needs to be included.

The current direction is the physical view of the chassis as it pertains
to network management and networks in general.

/David Arneson