IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: portDown/portUp

Paul DeBeasi <pdebeasi@chipcom.com> Mon, 12 October 1992 17:48 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10714; 12 Oct 92 13:48 EDT
Received: from NRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa10710; 12 Oct 92 13:48 EDT
Received: from CS.UTK.EDU by NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa20986; 12 Oct 92 13:49 EDT
Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA26815; Mon, 12 Oct 92 13:04:48 -0400
Received: from chipcom.com by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA26811; Mon, 12 Oct 92 13:04:43 -0400
Received: from mario.stealth ([192.41.247.29]) by chipcom.com (4.1/SMI-4.0) id AA02252; Mon, 12 Oct 92 13:02:18 EDT
Received: by mario.stealth (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA02552; Mon, 12 Oct 92 12:57:49 EDT
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 12:57:49 -0400
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.NRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Paul DeBeasi <pdebeasi@chipcom.com>
Message-Id: <9210121657.AA02552@mario.stealth>
To: fddi-mib@cs.utk.edu, anil@levers.enet.dec.com
Subject: Re: portDown/portUp


This sounds like a good idea to me.  What do others think?

Paul DeBeasi
pdebeasi@chipcom.com

----- Begin Included Message -----

From owner-fddi-mib@CS.UTK.EDU Fri Oct  9 18:14:49 1992
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 17:21:45 EDT
From: Anil Rijsinghani <anil@levers.enet.dec.com>
To: fddi-mib@cs.utk.edu
Subject: portDown/portUp
Content-Length: 499

    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


----- End Included Message -----

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email