Interface configuration
dan@lannet.com (Dan Romascanu) Thu, 03 September 1992 12:34 UTC
Return-Path: <owner-chassismib>
Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA24915; Thu, 3 Sep 92 08:34:33 -0400
Received: from [192.84.3.7] by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA24911; Thu, 3 Sep 92 08:34:15 -0400
Received: from moon.lannet.com ([149.49.50.12]) by lannet.com (4.1/3.1.090690-Lannet Data Communications) id AA26688; Thu, 3 Sep 92 11:04:56 IDT
Received: by moon.lannet.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA10609; Thu, 3 Sep 92 11:04:53 IDT
Date: Thu, 03 Sep 1992 11:04:53 -0000
Message-Id: <9209030804.AA10609@moon.lannet.com>
From: dan@lannet.com
To: chassismib@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Interface configuration
David Arneson (arneson@ctron.com) asks: > So where do others stand? If we find nobody else out there that agrees with > my self and Keith then the interface objects should be deleted from the MIB. I think they should remain in the MIB. They provide a standard tool to make information available about connectivity between entities within the chassis. They also allow mapping the external connections (interfaces, repeater / bridge ports) through entities to segments. Keith's proposal to add an indexType and indexValue is valuable and gives us the extensibility to ports which are not necessarely MIB interfaces. However, I would also put them, as David sugests, in a separate optional table, to make things simpler for those who do not need or cannot implement them. dan@lannet.com Dan Romascanu Systems Group Manager LANNET Data Communications, Ltd. Tel Aviv, Israel Voice: 972-3-6458414 Fax: 972-3-5447146
- Interface configuration David L. Arneson (arneson@ctron.com)
- Re: Interface configuration Kiho Yum
- Interface configuration Dan Romascanu
- Re: Interface configuration Bob Stewart
- Re: Interface configuration Bob Stewart
- Re: Interface configuration Bob Stewart