Re: Adjacency index

[Debasis Dalapati <[e-mail]>]

>
>From: [e-mail]
>
>Debasis,
>
>>>Could you repeat once more what the "INDEX" specification would look like for
>>>phivAdjEntry object ?
>
>Sure here is the entire table:
>
>Here is how the new table would look with new names etc.  Rather than
>tacking an N on at the end of each name, I just added node to the name
>in most cases which makes the meaning of the objects clear (I hope).
>
>       phivAdjNodeTable OBJECT-TYPE
>           SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF PhivAdjNodeEntry
>           ACCESS not-accessible
>           STATUS mandatory
>           DESCRIPTION
>               "The Adjacent Node Table."
>           ::= { adjacency 1 }
>
>       phivAdjNodeEntry OBJECT-TYPE
>           SYNTAX PhivAdjNodeEntry
>           ACCESS not-accessible
>           STATUS mandatory
>           DESCRIPTION
>               "There is one entry in the table for each adjacency."
>           INDEX  { phivAdjNodeCircuitIndex, phivAdjAddr }
>           ::= { phivAdjNodeTable 1 }
>
>       PhivAdjNodeEntry ::=
>           SEQUENCE {
>               phivAdjNodeCircuitIndex
>                   INTEGER,
>               phivAdjAddr
>                   PhivAddr,
>               phivAdjNodeBlockSize
>                   INTEGER,
>               phivAdjNodeListenTimer
>                   INTEGER (1..65535),
>               phivAdjNodeCircuitEtherServPhysAddr
>                   OCTET STRING,
>               phivAdjNodeType
>                   INTEGER,
>               phivAdjNodeState
>                   INTEGER,
>               phivAdjNodePriority
>                   INTEGER,
>               phivAdjNodeExecListenTimer
>                   INTEGER (1..65535)
>            }
>
>[ stuffs deleted ]
>
>

Jon,

Perfect! Well done with the names. 

Now as we are creating the new table, would it be appropriate to get rid
of the object phivAdjNodeExecListenTimer at this time?

Some time back, I asked a question about phivAdjListenTimer and 
phivAdjExecListenTimer and my understanding was that phivAdjExecListenTimer
could be dropped from the table. Well, there is no harm in keeping it, except
myself (and others) could avoid explaning it. :) Just reminding. 

debasis