Subject: Re: question on bridge mib rfc 1493

From: "Graeme Mckerrell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2000 08:28:18 +0000

A question for you shivendra. Your mentioned that collapsing bridge/slot/port
into a single index was tedious and difficult. Do your ports appear in the
interface table, if so what indexing scheme do you use there? There are plenty
of standard MIBs e.g. RMON, which require an interface index to operate, are you
having to take this same approach on all such MIBS?

In my opinion the encoding format you described is actually quite straight
forward. Simply because the resultant number when written in decimal is not easy
to decode, does't mean that within the context of an application this is
difficult. The SNMP requests themselves are encoded in a far more convoluted
manner! A good application will abstract away any of this "complexity" from the
user.

Regards
Graeme McKerrell

---

From: Kevin Lingle <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2000 09:52:09 -0500

Good points Graeme!

> having to take this same approach on all such MIBS?

Note also that the bridge mib itself provides a mapping of bridge port
number to ifIndex via dot1dBasePortIfIndex.

So there is a built-in mapping from any arbitrarily encoded dot1dBasePort
(bridge port) number back to some real physical interface.  Presuming the
interface is in ifTable (I sure hope it is... if not there are larger
problems here ;)

kevin

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 Kevin R. Lingle       919.392.2029
 checkout: http://wwwin-eng.cisco.com/Eng/IOS/SNMP_WWW/mib-police.html
 Sometimes I think I understand everything, then I regain consciousness.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=