opstat model questions

Jeff Yarnell <jeffya@teleport.com> Wed, 26 April 1995 18:32 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa09001; 26 Apr 95 14:32 EDT
Received: from [132.151.1.1] by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa08997; 26 Apr 95 14:32 EDT
Received: from wugate.wustl.edu by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa11674; 26 Apr 95 14:32 EDT
Received: from host (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wugate.wustl.edu (8.6.11/8.6.11) with SMTP id NAA28576; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 13:32:11 -0500
Received: from desiree.teleport.com (desiree.teleport.com [192.108.254.11]) by wugate.wustl.edu (8.6.11/8.6.11) with ESMTP id NAA28221 for <oswg-l@mail.wustl.edu>; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 13:26:26 -0500
Received: from yarnell (ip-pdx6-08.teleport.com [204.119.60.168]) by desiree.teleport.com (8.6.10/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA09792 for <oswg-l@mail.wustl.edu>; Wed, 26 Apr 1995 11:26:16 -0700
Message-Id: <199504261826.LAA09792@desiree.teleport.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 1995 11:27:40 -0700
Reply-To: oswg-l@wugate.wustl.edu
X-Orig-Sender: owner-oswg-l@wugate.wustl.edu
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Jeff Yarnell <jeffya@teleport.com>
To: oswg-l@wugate.wustl.edu
Subject: opstat model questions
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Sender: jeffya@mail.teleport.com
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Version 1.4.4
X-Listprocessor-Version: 7.1 -- ListProcessor by CREN

As a newcomer to the opstat working group I have several questions.
I have read the drafts associated with the group and like very 
much what is being done.

1. The Model for Common Operational Statistics draft mentions the 
Internet Standard MIB several times.  Does this term refer to 
MIB-II or the collection of all standard MIBs?

2. The discussion of metrics seems to be biased towards obtaining
data from MIB-II, and particularly from routers.  I have a couple
years of experience with RMON, and it seems like a natural supplier 
of network metrics data.  Has this, or other standard MIBs been 
considered?

3. The storage format described again seems to show a bias towards
routers.  Is there any reason that the "router-name" field couldn't
be something more abstract like host or device since other hosts 
on the network may supply network metrics?

4. Can someone clarify the "link-name" in the storage format?

Thanks for your assistance,

Jeff Yarnell
Kaspia Systems, Inc.