Re: Chassis MIB comments

[Mike MacFaden <[e-mail]>]

Ok, one lurker speaks up:

Bob Stewart writes:
>It would be good to get this work finished, but we don't seem to be settling
>very well.  People seem apathetic or confused, or just too busy to think about
>it.  It would be helpful if people would at least express that level of input.
>We need a sense of:
>
>    1)  Like it as it is
>
>    2)  It needs a little more work
>
>    3)  It needs a lot more work
>
>    4)  Don't care
>
>    5)  Care, but don't have time to assess work needed
>
>    6)  Care, but don't understand
>
>    7)  Let's wait for OSI to define it
>
>    8)  We don't need to finish this

I joined this group late, and would have to vote for 6 as I 
am still learning to program snmp and do mib development. 

Our product needs this mib. It matches our product 
layout (slot/card/unit). For instance, A generic mib browser should 
be able to ask our product "What's installed?" and the response should be
something like: 
	Slot 2 is a Dual Port T1. The first t1 is CSU, second slot is CEPT.
	Slot 3 is a Dual Port T1. The first t1 is CSU, second slot is CEPT redundant
	Slot 4 is a Primary Rate ISDN 8 ports
	Slot 5 is a Inverse Mux  
	Slot 6 is a RS-530 High Speed Data
	Slot 7 is a V.35 High Speed Data
	Slot 8 is a 8 Port E&M.... 

Then to answer the question: "How is it configured?" the response should
be the standard internet mib that corresponds to the logical/physical interface
(T1/E1, ISDN,...).

This is possible with any existing standard mib? I think not.

Regards,
Mike MacFaden
Premisys Communications, Inc  Palo Alto, CA USA