Ascend Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(ASCEND) Re: SNMP Interface representation
>From: Phillip Vandry [SMTP:vandry@Mlink.NET]
>
>> 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.
>
>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.
>
>- -Phil
I totally agree with this methodology. I don't care about the switched
connections. I care about the nailed ones.
The routine around here is: Max resets (pick a reason). Tech finds what T1
profiles moved where and tells our SNMP bandwidth graphing app about it.
Repeat.
Gets old.
Peter Lalor
Infoasis
plalor@infoasis.com
http://www.infoasis.com/
415-459-7991 x102
415-459-7992 fax
++ Ascend Users Mailing List ++
To unsubscribe: send unsubscribe to ascend-users-request@bungi.com
To get FAQ'd: <http://www.nealis.net/ascend/faq>
Follow-Ups: