[cgl_discussion] IPv6 MIBs/SNMP requirements/support

[Venkata Jagana]

>Some of you might recall, that I have talked about SNMP set() functions
>previously in F2F meetings, and my take would be that we do not
>initially implement set functions, until somebody proves they are needed
>and is willing to invest resources for that.

>From a practical deployment standpoint, I believe most customers
do not want to enable the set functionality for whatever reasons they
believe in. However, this can be accomplished easily by setting to
disable by default and only allow enablement if customers wish to
change it.

However, from an implementation and resource investment perspective,
it is not a significant effort (few days worth of development resource)
since there are at most 10 object elements that are needed to be
supported for write access.

Thanks,
Venkat





                                                                                                                                         
                      Mika Kukkonen                                                                                                      
                      <mika at osdl.org>                 To:       "Zou, Yixiong" <yixiong.zou at intel.com>                                   
                      Sent by:                        cc:       Venkata Jagana/Beaverton/IBM at IBMUS, cgl_discussion at osdl.org,             
                      cgl_discussion-admin at lis         "'Randy.Dunlap'" <rddunlap at osdl.org>                                              
                      ts.osdl.org                     Subject:  RE: [cgl_discussion] IPv6 MIBs/SNMP requirements/support                 
                                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                         
                      02/20/2003 02:50 PM                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                                         




Some of you might recall, that I have talked about SNMP set() functions
previously in F2F meetings, and my take would be that we do not
initially implement set functions, until somebody proves they are needed
and is willing to invest resources for that.

--MiKu

On to, 2003-02-20 at 14:39, Zou, Yixiong wrote:
> > Based on the MIBs defined, these are the objects that can be "set":
> >
> >     IPV6-TCP-MIB::ipv6TcpConnState
> >     IPV6-MIB::ipv6Forwording
> >     IPV6-MIB::ipv6DefaultHopLimit
> >     IPV6-MIB::ipv6IfDescr
> >     IPV6-MIB::ipv6IfIdentifier
> >     IPV6-MIB::ipv6IfIdentifierLength
> >     IPV6-MIB::ipv6IfAdminStatus
> >     IPV6-MIB::ipv6RouteValid
> >     IPV6-MIB::ipv6NetToMediaValid
> >
> > 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.
> _______________________________________________
> cgl_discussion mailing list
> cgl_discussion at lists.osdl.org
> http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/cgl_discussion


_______________________________________________
cgl_discussion mailing list
cgl_discussion at lists.osdl.org
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/cgl_discussion