Re: [VRRP] FW: VRRPV3-MIB protocol error trap question

"Kalyan (Srinivas)Tata" <> Mon, 24 September 2012 23:28 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 192031F041D for <>; Mon, 24 Sep 2012 16:28:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.391
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.391 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.207, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X22Mgs0r5W3X for <>; Mon, 24 Sep 2012 16:28:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48D701F042B for <>; Mon, 24 Sep 2012 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-CheckPoint: {5060EE8D-2-8AF0C8D8-FFFF}
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q8ONSoUm025980; Mon, 24 Sep 2012 16:28:50 -0700
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi; Mon, 24 Sep 2012 16:28:50 -0700
From: "Kalyan (Srinivas)Tata" <>
To: "" <>, "" <>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 16:28:48 -0700
Thread-Topic: [VRRP] FW: VRRPV3-MIB protocol error trap question
Thread-Index: AQG2x6W6pjWvPTAHkQf9MKEmeZXpWAH/6dWZl6yn2WCACxV1wA==
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <03b001cd951b$e7b3d370$b71b7a50$>
In-Reply-To: <03b001cd951b$e7b3d370$b71b7a50$>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
x-kse-antivirus-interceptor-info: scan successful
x-kse-antivirus-info: Clean
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BE5C948D3F924B40BAAF2F4D9210F5411E4C4479D8USEXCHANGEadc_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [VRRP] FW: VRRPV3-MIB protocol error trap question
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 23:28:53 -0000

Hi Adrian,
               I replied to that email too fast without reviewing the history. Please disregard my reply.  Creating the OID with the invalid VRID received and setting the vrrpv3StatisticsProtoErrReason to vrIdError(4) would be the correct behavior.
From: Adrian Farrel []
Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 2:32 PM
To: Kalyan (Srinivas)Tata;
Subject: RE: [VRRP] FW: VRRPV3-MIB protocol error trap question

Is there an Erratum that should be raised for this?

From:<> []<mailto:[]> On Behalf Of Kalyan (Srinivas)Tata
Sent: 06 September 2012 04:12
Subject: [VRRP] FW: VRRPV3-MIB protocol error trap question

From: Kalyan (Srinivas)Tata
Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2012 8:11 PM
To: 'tony vanderpeet'
Subject: RE: [VRRP] VRRPV3-MIB protocol error trap question

Hi Tony,

This was an editing error in which the  vrIdError was not removed from the vrrpV3StatisticsProtoErrReason when vrrpv3RouterVrIdErrors was added as a global counter.

(exactly for the reason you mentioned)

vrrpv3RouterVrIdErrors should be used for counting the number of vrid errors.
From:<> []<mailto:[]> On Behalf Of tony vanderpeet
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2012 6:25 PM
Subject: [VRRP] VRRPV3-MIB protocol error trap question

I am implementing the protocol error trap in the VRRPV3 MIB and have spotted a possible hole in the MIB. I wonder if this was picked up in discussions and a work-around devised?

When an advertisement is received with an unrecognised VR ID, a protocol error trap is generated, with the object vrrpv3StatisticsProtoErrReason. This object has value vrIdError(4) in this case, but what should the index of the object be? In particular, what should the VR ID part of the index be?

I am inclined to create a variable binding with a fake OID using the unrecognised VR ID, since this will actually convey the information required (which VR ID is invalid, and the address type and ifIndex).

What, if any, discussion has taken place around this issue, and was there any conclusion reached?



Tony van der Peet
Software Architect
Allied Telesis Labs Limited
27 Nazareth Ave
Christchurch, NZ
Tel: +64-3-3399532 (DDI)
Mob: +64-27-2091860