Re: Issues and Next draft

Manu Kaycee <kaycee@cardinals.ctron.com> Tue, 15 September 1992 16:31 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-chassismib>
Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA06506; Tue, 15 Sep 92 12:31:10 -0400
Received: from nic.near.net by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA06502; Tue, 15 Sep 92 12:31:04 -0400
Received: from ctron.com by nic.near.net id aa16936; 15 Sep 92 12:30 EDT
Received: from cardinals.ctron (cardinals.ctron.com) by ctron.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA12607; Tue, 15 Sep 92 12:38:29 EDT
Received: from vishnu.ctron by cardinals.ctron (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA20627; Tue, 15 Sep 92 12:26:35 EDT
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 12:26:35 -0400
From: Manu Kaycee <kaycee@cardinals.ctron.com>
Message-Id: <9209151626.AA20627@cardinals.ctron>
To: chassismib@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: Issues and Next draft
Cc: kaycee@cardinals.ctron.com



A week or two ago we had an energetic discussion, on this mailing list,
about an "interface" table.  Dave A. proposed it for consideration, since it
presented a logical to physical mapping.  Whether such a table should reside
within the chassis mib was also discussed.

Briefly, let's consider the case where multiple modules are used to realize
a single entity.  Depending on where, and how, the agent(s) and managed
objects are realized, such a logical to physical mapping is required, internal
to said entity.  (Case in point: the ifTable...which interface resides on which
module?)

Now, for two questions.  At lease one of them has been asked before, with
insufficient response.  Hence, this poll.

	1.  Is there added value, if such mapping information is made
            available, externally?  What do other WG members feel?

            (I believe it provide extra, added value...details not
            not articulated, here.)

	2.  Does a table providing such mapping information belong in
            the chassis mib?  What do other WG members feel?

	    (I believe it does.)

WG members, comments?

Cheers,


/Manu.