Re: [Tsvwg] TCP and UDP MIB issues

[Anders Persson <[e-mail]>]

Gorry,

The same general issue does seem to appear within the UDP-Lite MIB, 
which is how to deal with multiple processes using the same UDP-Lite 
endpoint. For example, on a system using sockets, you can have one 
socket being shared between multiple processes if the creator of the 
socket uses fork() to create child processes. However, with the current 
MIB it is only possible to associate one processes with an endpoint.

There are at least four ways this could be addressed:
    (1) Use udpliteEndpointInstance to create multiple entries. 
Unfortunately, this approach
         makes it look like multiple independent endpoints, which might 
be a bit deceiving
    (2) Make udpliteEndpointProcess part of the INDEX
    (3) Create a new Identifier object (like tcpEStatsConnectIdEntry), 
which could then be
         referenced by other tables. For example, we could then have 
udpliteProcessTable
    (4) Create udpliteProcessTable that mirrors the INDEX of 
udpliteEndpointTable, but adds
         udpliteEndpointProcess to the INDEX as well :-(

My personal choice would be (3), as it allows the MIB to be extended in 
the future.

Cheers,
Anders

Gorry Fairhurst wrote:
>
> Generally, the proposed UDP-Lite MIB follows that for UDP (supporting 
> both multicast and unicast). It does differ in the udpliteEndpointTable:
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/tsvwg/draft-renker-tsvwg-udplite-mib-01.txt
>
> If there are implications on the UDP-Lite MIB, we'd be pleased to try 
> to understand what these are, and any ideas of what we should do.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Gorry
>