Re: Deleting channels...

Gary Ellis <garye@hpspdla.spd.hp.com> Mon, 09 December 1991 22:03 UTC

Received: from mtigate.mti.com by NRI.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05531; 9 Dec 91 17:03 EST
Received: by mtigate.mti.com id AA24575 (5.65+/IDA-1.3.5); Mon, 9 Dec 91 13:22:05 -0800
Received: from relay.hp.com by mtigate.mti.com with SMTP id AA24571 (5.65+/IDA-1.3.5); Mon, 9 Dec 91 13:22:01 -0800
Received: from hpspd.spd.hp.com by relay.hp.com with SMTP (16.6/15.5+IOS 3.13) id AA24671; Mon, 9 Dec 91 13:21:53 -0800
Received: from hpspdla.spd.hp.com by hpspd.spd.hp.com with SMTP (15.11/15.5+IOS 3.12) id AA10151; Mon, 9 Dec 91 13:22:30 pst
Received: by hpspdla.spd.hp.com (16.6/15.5+IOS 3.12) id AA22857; Mon, 9 Dec 91 13:20:33 -0800
From: Gary Ellis <garye@hpspdla.spd.hp.com>
Message-Id: <9112092120.AA22857@hpspdla.spd.hp.com>
Subject: Re: Deleting channels...
To: Robin Iddon <robini@spider.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 1991 13:20:32 -0800
Cc: RMONMIB mailing list <rmonmib@mti.com>
In-Reply-To: <11561.9112071405@orbweb.spider.co.uk>; from "Robin Iddon" at Dec 7, 91 2:05 pm
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]

Robin Iddon writes:
> 
> IMHO it would be unfriendly to invalidate them - what if the application
> deleted the channel merely to re-insert it with different event indices ?  It
> wouldn't be too happy having to re-download all those tedious filters again.
> 

Although I may be making my bias as an agent writer painfully clear here,
it is my impression that one reason for the "underCreation" state is so
that a manager can make a change to a control table row without deleting
it.  e.g.......

	set the status object (from valid) to underCreation
	change the event index
	set the status object back to valid

If done this way, the need for child rows to remain when the parent is
deleted is obviated, no?


---------------------------------------------------------
Gary Ellis                       (garye@hpspd.spd.hp.com)
Hewlett-Packard Company -- Intelligent Networks Operation