Re: ifTable Extensions

Sandra Durham <sdurham@cisco.com> Fri, 04 April 1997 19:06 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa22566; 4 Apr 97 14:06 EST
Received: from portal.ex.tis.com by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa15793; 4 Apr 97 14:06 EST
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by portal.ex.tis.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) id NAA12448 for snmpv2-outgoing; Fri, 4 Apr 1997 13:50:57 -0500 (EST)
From: Sandra Durham <sdurham@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <199704041852.KAA03541@nacho.cisco.com>
Subject: Re: ifTable Extensions
To: Victor Volpe <vvolpe@smtp.microcom.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 1997 10:52:27 -0800
Cc: snmpv2@tis.com
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-snmpv2@ex.tis.com
Precedence: bulk

> 
> Can anyone shed some light on the use of the ifGeneralGroup and ifPacketGroup
> They seem to be just repackaged ifTable objects.  They are not defined as 
> tables so it does not look like they can be retrieved from an agent.

ifGeneralGroup, and ifPacketGroup are part of the conformance statements
for the IF-MIB.  If you are unfamiliar with conformance issues,
you should probably go read rfc1904.

the basic deal here is that an agent implementation can be considered
conformant to the IF-MIB if it implements the appropriate
groups for a given interface media type.  And thus the ifTable will
have sparse rows. (as in if media type A requires only the
ifGeneralGroup, then the associated ifTable rows will return
noSuchInstance for things like ifInUcastPkts, etc).

Sandra Durham