Re: Adjacency index Fri, 28 August 1992 18:09 UTC

Received: from by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05114; 28 Aug 92 14:09 EDT
Received: from NRI.NRI.Reston.Va.US by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05110; 28 Aug 92 14:09 EDT
Received: from by NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12762; 28 Aug 92 14:11 EDT
Received: by; id AA11749; Fri, 28 Aug 92 11:07:56 -0700
Received: by; id AA11068; Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:48:12 -0700
Received: by; id AA11064; Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:48:11 -0700
Received: by; id AA10483; Fri, 28 Aug 92 10:48:10 -0700
Received: by (5.57/ULTRIX-fma-071891); id AA11023; Fri, 28 Aug 92 13:50:45 -0400
Message-Id: <>
To: Bob Stewart <>
Subject: Re: Adjacency index
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 28 Aug 92 13:31:02 CDT." <>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 13:50:45 -0400
X-Mts: smtp

Bob said:
>I've been thinking all along that the circuit number we're talking about is
>the unique index per known circuit that's used to find a circuit in the MIB
>circuit tables.  I don't see a motivation to use any other circuit
>identification for the adjacency table.  Circuit index is the common thread
>throughout the MIB.

And all Jon can add is yes, Yes, YES.


PS- Here is a for free helpful (I hope) hint to anybody writing managment
software.  If I were to write an application, I would construct it so that
when 'getting' Adjacency information, I would also get and present to the
user, most of the entire row of the circuit paratmers table for the circuit 
which is identified by the phivAdjCircuitIndex (this is the same value as the
unique circuit index).  Things like circuit state etc, are very relavant -
I am sure just about everyone on this list knows this and could construct a
very useful presentation of the information.