Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(ASCEND) SNMP Interface representation
Pretty damn close to what we have begun drafting. Certainly the nailed
Connections shouldn't dance around.
ken
-----Original Message-----
From: Phillip Vandry [SMTP:vandry@Mlink.NET]
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 1997 9:10 AM
To: Ken Packert
Cc: ascend-users@bungi.com
Subject: Re: (ASCEND) BGP 4 ?
> We are fixing the interface numbering as I've stated many times. It is quite a
> large undertaking but is essential. I will post, as promised, our proposed fix
> to see if it jibes with what you all are expecting.
>
> The issue of dialed interface handling is not done well by any vendor. Every im
> plementation has shortcomings. If I am wrong about this please correct me. All
> input on this issue is desired. The IETF certainly does not have a reasonable i
> mplementation either. They are forging ahead with the notion that every VC shou
> ld have and an ifIndex. What do you do with a box like the TNT that can handle
> a T3? Traverse 672 interfaces? That will take 3 or 4 minutes.
How about this:
Recognize that we are almost never interested in everybody who connects.
Implement a configured static mapping between connection profiles and
ifIndices. Allow maybe 200 of these mappings, as memory permits.
Then if I want to monitor my dedicated customers, they probably fit in the
static mappings, so I can assign them an ifIndex and use that ifIndex to
monitor them whereas I will not assign a mapping to Joe 28.8 User.
Joe 28.8 User may not get an ifIndex or may just get a dynamic one after
the static mappings.
-Phil
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>