IETF Logo Mail Archive

portDown/portUp

Anil Rijsinghani <anil@levers.enet.dec.com> Fri, 09 October 1992 22:22 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18319; 9 Oct 92 18:22 EDT
Received: from NRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa18315; 9 Oct 92 18:22 EDT
Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa19972; 9 Oct 92 18:22 EDT
Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA06158; Fri, 9 Oct 92 17:24:29 -0400
Received: from inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA06154; Fri, 9 Oct 92 17:24:25 -0400
Received: by inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com; id AA17557; Fri, 9 Oct 92 14:24:18 -0700
Received: by us1rmc.bb.dec.com; id AA24115; Fri, 9 Oct 92 17:21:37 -0400
Message-Id: <9210092121.AA24115@us1rmc.bb.dec.com>
Received: from levers.enet; by us1rmc.enet; Fri, 9 Oct 92 17:21:45 EDT
Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1992 17:21:45 -0400
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Anil Rijsinghani <anil@levers.enet.dec.com>
To: fddi-mib@cs.utk.edu
Apparently-To: fddi-mib@cs.utk.edu
Subject: portDown/portUp

    Hi,

    In FDDI concentrators, when a port goes down you can't send a
    linkDown trap.  As a result there's no asynchronous notification
    to the manager of a breakdown in the network.  Multiple customers
    have reported that polling is not timely enough in this case,
    and we have ended up defining enterprise-specific traps for
    this purpose.

    Would it be useful to do this in a standard way across all vendors
    by defining portDown/portUp traps in the FDDI MIB?

    Anil

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email