From bridge-mib-bounces@ietf.org Tue Apr 17 05:01:13 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HdjYk-0006MG-Hi; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 05:01:10 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HdjYi-0006M7-Mm for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 05:01:08 -0400 Received: from nj300815-nj-outbound.net.avaya.com ([198.152.12.100] helo=nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HdjYh-0002UZ-5N for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2007 05:01:08 -0400 Received: from 51.105.64.135.in-addr.arpa (HELO IS0004AVEXU1.global.avaya.com) ([135.64.105.51]) by nj300815-nj-outbound.avaya.com with ESMTP; 17 Apr 2007 05:01:06 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: i="4.14,418,1170651600"; d="scan'208"; a="4494891:sNHT9384432" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6603.0 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 12:01:05 +0300 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Static fdb table in q-bridge MIB? Thread-Index: AceATgjV32vJM0IORFeEhgLtFtmPwQAgNemQ From: "Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)" To: "Bridge-Mib \(E-mail\)" X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17 Subject: [Bridge-mib] FW: Static fdb table in q-bridge MIB? X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Bridge MIB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bridge-mib-bounces@ietf.org =20 =20 -----Original Message----- From: David Levi [mailto:dlevi@nortel.com]=20 Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 8:38 PM To: Glenn Parsons; Paul Bottorff; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Wijnen, Bert (Bert) Subject: Static fdb table in q-bridge MIB? Hi All, I was just about to make an update to the table for defining static fdb entries in the new q-bridge MIB based on .1ah clause 12.7.7. However, there is no such table either in the new MIB, nor in the q-bridge MIB from RFC 4363. However, in RFC 4363, there is a reference to an object called 'dot1qStaticAddress' in the DESCRIPTION of dot1qTpFdbStatus in the dot1qTpFdbTable. Does anybody know if there is a reason why there is no such table in RFC 4363? Does it make sense to add such a table in the new q-bridge MIB? Note that there is an equivalent table in the original bridge-mib, called the dot1dStaticTable. Of course, that table doesn't have a fid in the index. Seems like that table was lost in the translation to the q-bridge mib. -Dave ------------------------------------------------------------------------ David B. Levi Nortel Networks dlevi@nortelnetworks.com Voice: +1 408 495 5138 ESN: 265-5138 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib From bridge-mib-bounces@ietf.org Thu Apr 19 17:51:20 2007 Return-path: Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HeeX6-0004K3-Dz; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:51:16 -0400 Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HeeUW-0008Ht-3i for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:48:36 -0400 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.179]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HeeUU-0000VL-Rf for bridge-mib@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:48:36 -0400 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id f31so595763pyh for ; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:48:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=OqTGBKiVyviSmaaoxYamXDp1sM14xpzpijsEmol/cmJrsaaHU1dmVWynx0obBBwdGHCLmvzE4hNhZDxG0wWEelzCmrMMfVbua5HHOdYdP5OA4vn7l/0DEEHYtZ8VqOZFEV+7UeE51F+noCD/4s/UmrGnqMs/KhT10gIReCHOeW8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=UUOr5a09C30PwTmAJvhkQkXGmuEGuPV7g5r5PVm3ZrvzLemeG9eIHUgYyDY4Kgaj7ytp1JcgdAkWpQg7/xRfPcIHHChHpPfDNAPbBK/0p9m158Y+SvR3iuI/gmmy+KvDdB8sG4MrTr/2GYrZKUkMGw3OGOeh7+CoEWn0x8Weh4M= Received: by 10.65.113.17 with SMTP id q17mr4585206qbm.1177019310362; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.232.8 with HTTP; Thu, 19 Apr 2007 14:48:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <2e428fb40704191448q209c0656if45ef91e5133932d@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 22:48:30 +0100 From: "Les Bell" To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" Subject: Re: [Bridge-mib] FW: Static fdb table in q-bridge MIB? In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4d87d2aa806f79fed918a62e834505ca X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 17:51:15 -0400 Cc: "Bridge-Mib \(E-mail\)" X-BeenThere: bridge-mib@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: IETF Bridge MIB List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bridge-mib-bounces@ietf.org The dot1dStaticTable was replaced in the q-bridge mib with two tables: dot1qStaticUnicastTable and dot1qStaticMulticastTable. The reason for this is because the definitions of these tables in the 802.1Q spec had different indices. The unicast table is indexed by FDB ID, the multicast table is indexed by VLAN ID. Both of these tables are defined in RFC 4363. Les... On 17/04/07, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote: > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: David Levi [mailto:dlevi@nortel.com] > Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 8:38 PM > To: Glenn Parsons; Paul Bottorff; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Wijnen, Bert > (Bert) > Subject: Static fdb table in q-bridge MIB? > > Hi All, > > I was just about to make an update to the table for defining static fdb > entries in the new q-bridge MIB based on .1ah clause 12.7.7. However, > there is no such table either in the new MIB, nor in the q-bridge MIB > from RFC 4363. However, in RFC 4363, there is a reference to an object > called 'dot1qStaticAddress' in the DESCRIPTION of dot1qTpFdbStatus in > the dot1qTpFdbTable. Does anybody know if there is a reason why there > is no such table in RFC 4363? Does it make sense to add such a table in > the new q-bridge MIB? > > Note that there is an equivalent table in the original bridge-mib, > called the dot1dStaticTable. Of course, that table doesn't have a fid > in the index. Seems like that table was lost in the translation to the > q-bridge mib. > > -Dave > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > David B. Levi Nortel Networks dlevi@nortelnetworks.com > Voice: +1 408 495 5138 ESN: 265-5138 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Bridge-mib mailing list > Bridge-mib@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib > _______________________________________________ Bridge-mib mailing list Bridge-mib@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib