[cgl_discussion] IPv6 MIBs/SNMP requirements/support
jagana at us.ibm.com
Thu Feb 20 15:17:46 PST 2003
>One more thing, do we need to implement those "set" functions?
>From a MIB definition stand point, it is always 'required'
(unless it says optional) so that it gives the flexibility
to control these parameters from remote mgmt station. However,
in most cases, customers won't implement the set capability
but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be implemented. By default,
the 'set' functionality can be disabled and however, can only be
enabled if desired.
>Most of those defined in IPV6-MIB are not "required" by the MIB.
Don't think so :) Did you see any stmt from the spec that they are not
<yixiong.zou at inte To: Venkata Jagana/Beaverton/IBM at IBMUS
l.com> cc: cgl_discussion at osdl.org, "'Randy.Dunlap'" <rddunlap at osdl.org>
Subject: RE: [cgl_discussion] IPv6 MIBs/SNMP requirements/support
> Based on the MIBs defined, these are the objects that can be "set":
> Currently none of these is implemented in NET-SNMP.
One more thing, do we need to implement those "set" functions?
Most of those defined in IPV6-MIB are not "required" by the MIB.
More information about the cgl_discussion