Re: RIP-2 Addresses Links and MIB problems

[Fred Baker <[e-mail]>]

}} > The address of the routing neighbor is not sufficient to identify
}} > an unnumbered link, for two reasons. First, it is possible to have
}} > two links to the same neighbor; this would not distinguish them.
}} 
}} How is this problem different than the one solved by OSPF fir the
}} ospfAddressLessIf variable indicating the interface index?  For
}} unnumbered links (in this case links where the local address is not
}} unique) you set this variable to the MIB Index of the interface.

It is exactly the same problem. The same solution would work.

}} > Second, it is possible to have an interface with no active neighbor
}} > at all. In that case, it is not possible to configure the interface.
}} > It is not possible to turn it on since, without an active neighbor,
}} > it has no name.
}} 
}} Why not?  Just multicast or all-ones broadcast RIP packets to the
}} other side of the interface.  Maybe you can clarify, I am not dealing
}} with true unnumbered interfaces so I may not fully understand the
}} situation.

Imagine you have a serial interface with no plug in it.
How does the multicast get to the neighbor to elicit a reply?
now, imagine you want to use an SNMP SET to configure some
parameter on the interface - perhaps to say "use RIP-II on the interface."
What instance do you use to identify the interface? There's a chicken
and egg problem here.

}} > For this reason, if unnumbered interfaces are in view, I would suggest
}} > simply numbering them.
}} 
}} You mean assign IP addresses to them?  In my case they have IP
}} addresses, but they are not unique, they may be the same for multiple
}} P2P interfaces and up to one non-P2P (i.e. Ethernet) interfaces.
}} Internally I refer to them my their destination address, but those
}} destination addresses are not really my interface addresses so I
}} shouldn't report them in the MIB.  If I report the local addresses the
}} MIB falls apart.

sorry, unclear: give them simple numbers like 1, 2, 3, 4; could be
equal to ifIndex if you like. The IP address becomes an attribute of
the interface, not an identifier for the interface. better?