Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] RFC 4001 question

["Biton, Shlomi (Shlomi)" <sbiton at avaya.com>]

Hi,
What about trap varbind presentation? Or table view in MIB browsers? Are
the trap daemon and MIB browser knows to search for the Address type MIB
item and present IPv4/IPv6 address/FQDN correctly? Do you know if there
is a real MIB browser/trap daemon that implement such logic?
Thanks,
Shlomi 

-----Original Message-----
From: David Harrington [mailto:ietfdbh at comcast.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 5:37 PM
To: Biton, Shlomi (Shlomi); 'Bert (IETF) Wijnen'; Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
Cc: mib-doctors at ietf.org
Subject: RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] RFC 4001 question

Hi,

I think the right answer is "use a tool that supports multiple varbinds
in a message".

I don't have the time right now to look up the reference, but I think
support for multiple varbinds is required for compliance to the SNMPv3
standard. That is probably stated in RFC 3416.

dbh

> -----Original Message-----
> From: mib-doctors-bounces at ietf.org
> [mailto:mib-doctors-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Biton, Shlomi 
> (Shlomi)
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 6:44 AM
> To: Bert (IETF) Wijnen; Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: mib-doctors at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] RFC 4001 question
> 
> Hi,
> What about case where the row is static/active and some of the 
> vardinds can be configured as InetAddressType/InetAddress?
> Thanks,
> Shlomi
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bert (IETF) Wijnen [mailto:bertietf at bwijnen.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 26, 2009 12:54 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
> Cc: Juergen Schoenwaelder; mib-doctors at ietf.org; Biton, Shlomi 
> (Shlomi)
> Subject: Re: [MIB-DOCTORS] RFC 4001 question
> 
> I would think that if the InetAddressType/InetAddress pair is part of 
> a row in a read-create table, that the browser user could do:
> - set row to notInService
> - change InetAddressType
> - change InetAddres
> - set row active
> 
> Each as a separate SNMP SET request. Not ideal, but doable.
> It of course also means that the agent must support the notInService 
> for this to work (which may not always be the case... some 
> MODULE-COMPLIANCES actually do not require support for not_inService 
> ...
> or so I thought).
> 
> Bert
> 
> 
> Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> >  
> >
> >   
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Juergen Schoenwaelder
> >>     
> >
> >
> >   
> >> With "multiple SetRequest" you probably mean a single
> SetRequest with
> 
> >> multiple varbinds.
> >>     
> >
> > Yes. Multiple Sets request :-)
> >
> >   
> >> If that interpretation is
> >> correct, then yes a MIB browser that can do only single varbind 
> >> SetRequests might have a problem with a compliant implementation.
> >>
> >>     
> >
> > That was my guess. 
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Dan
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > MIB-DOCTORS mailing list
> > MIB-DOCTORS at ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors
> >
> >
> >   
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MIB-DOCTORS mailing list
> MIB-DOCTORS at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib-doctors
>