[cgl_discussion] New Top Issues item: SVC.1.4 - UDP MIBS

Venkata Jagana jagana at us.ibm.com
Wed Nov 5 18:39:57 PST 2003







Hi Yixiong,

Glad you clarified this. OK, this UDP6/4 MIB implementation will now
turn out to be scratch implementation in net-snmp for linux then.

Do you know whether net-snmp is doing anything to support on BSD
based on these new combined MIBs? If they are already then it will become
easier for you to support it because they would have already agreed
upon the framework to support these combined MIBs.

bottomline: the net-snmp portion will become an issue for end of 2003.

Julie, based on this info, I think it is reasonable to track this item
as an issue.

Thanks,
Venkat




                                                                                                                                      
                      "Zou, Yixiong"                                                                                                  
                      <yixiong.zou at inte        To:       Venkata Jagana/Beaverton/IBM at IBMUS, "Fleischer, Julie N"                     
                      l.com>                    <julie.n.fleischer at intel.com>                                                         
                                               cc:       <cgl_discussion at osdl.org>                                                    
                      11/05/2003 06:20         Subject:  RE: [cgl_discussion] New Top Issues item:  SVC.1.4 - UDP MIBS                
                      PM                                                                                                              
                                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                      




Ok, let me clarify one thing.  I originally said that TCPv6 and UDPv6
are implemented in NET-SNMP but I couldn't verify it.  It turns
out it is implemented but not for Linux.  Most of the IPv6 features in
NET-SNMP are for BSD systems.  So you can say that there is actually
no implementation in user-space.

I was planning on for IP and TCP to be done by the end of the year
since there is no UDP mib. Now I am not sure if we have enough time
for UDP.  We have to do both v4 and v6 in the user space because
of the combined mib so the work load just multiplied.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yixiong Zou (yixiong.zou at intel.com)
(503) 677-4988

All views expressed in this email are those of the individual sender.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cgl_discussion-bounces at lists.osdl.org
> [mailto:cgl_discussion-bounces at lists.osdl.org] On Behalf Of
> Venkata Jagana
> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2003 5:52 PM
> To: Fleischer, Julie N
> Cc: cgl_discussion at osdl.org
> Subject: Re: [cgl_discussion] New Top Issues item: SVC.1.4 - UDP MIBS
>
> Looks like this problem is blown out of proportion but let me
> try to clarify this :)
>
> Please keep in mind that corresponding to each of the MIBs, there is a
> user (net-snmp) and a kernel component. As far as the kernel component
> goes,
> IBM is still aiming to complete the implementation of UDP MIB
> by end of
> this year and in fact, the implementation will be based upon the new
> unified UDP draft (which is not going to be a major change from the
> current UDP/IPv6 RFC document except for the fact that now both IPv4
> and Ipv6 are combined). I am not sure about what Yixiong's plans
> are regarding this MIB support as far user component (net-snmp) goes
> but I would believe that if it is committed to be implemented
> by end of
> this year then I don't see any problem with this new draft either.
> If you are still seeing this as an issue, then you need to track it.
>
> >In addition, there is no open source implementation of the old RFC.
>
> This is not true for both kernel and user (net-snmp) components.
> btw, there exists an implementation for Ipv6 UDP MIB within the kernel
> source tree but it is incorrectly implemented. And as far as the user
> component goes, according to Yixiong, there already exists an
> implementation within net-snmp per old RFC (see this following thread
> (http://lists.osdl.org/pipermail/cgl_discussion/2003-February/
> 000922.html)
> but this implementation need to change based upon the new draft.
>
> >So, I propose we place this on the Top Issues list to track to ensure
> >there is an open source project that meets
>
> I don't see a need for separate open source project. There
> already exists
> net-snmp to cover user portion and the kernel components are submitted
> to the mainline and they are getting accepted and integrated.
>
> However, I agree that we need to track this as a top issue
> since there are
> so many dependencies (kernel/net-snmp/ietf standard/..) and
> we don't have
> much time left.
>
> Thanks,
> Venkat
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>                       "Fleischer, Julie N"
>
>
>                       <julie.n.fleischer at intel.c        To:
>     <cgl_discussion at osdl.org>
>
>                       om>                               cc:
>
>
>                       Sent by:
> Subject:  [cgl_discussion] New Top Issues item:  SVC.1.4 -
> UDP MIBS
>                       cgl_discussion-bounces at lis
>
>
>                       ts.osdl.org
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>                       11/05/2003 04:03 PM
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Along the lines of our SVC.1.4 discussion on the errata for this
> requirement:  Because the UDB MIBS draft is new, there isn't
> be enough time
> to implement a product based on this draft this year (see Yixiong's
> original email).  There was also originally some concern that
> it is still
> unstable, but Venkata believes that it is not.  In addition,
> there is no
> open source implementation of the old RFC.
>
> So, we don't currently have a PoC implementation for the UDP
> MIBS portion
> of SVC.1.4.  Yixiong believes that by Q1 of 2004 there could be an
> implementation (It's not in our original goal of end of 2003,
> but maybe
> this would meet distros schedule nonetheless?).
>
> So, I propose we place this on the Top Issues list to track
> to ensure there
> is an open source project that meets all of requirement
> SVC.1.4 for CGL 2.0
> at least by Q1 2004.
>
> - Julie
>
> **These views are not necessarily those of my employer.**
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>






More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list