Subject: (FRNETMIB) FR SLA MIB - Issue 3 - Table Fragmentation

From: "Rehbehn, Kenneth" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 May 2000 16:27:20 -0400

> > 3) Having separate data and availability history tables does not
> > make sense.
> > A single table is used for free running counters that populate the
> > two
> > separate tables.  Likewise, make the MIB simpler by having a single
> > sample
> > table that includes both data and availability.  Do users really
> > have a need
> > to do independent history collections of availability and DDR? Would
> >
> > someone, for example, want fifty samples at 15 minute intervals for
> > availability but want only 25 samples for DDR?
> 
> The data and availability were both in one table in the pre-draft
> state of this MIB.  However, it was requested at that time that they
> be separated.  The extra table allows more flexibility without adding
> much complication, so I did not disagree with the request.   I can see
> users wanting day samples of Availability and fifteen minute samples
> of the other statistics.

If they need to have different sampling characteristics then they can add a
new row to the frsldSmplCtrlTable.  They don't need to be in two different
tables.

When all is said and done, frsldPvcAvailSampleTable exists to support a
grand total two objects: unavailable time and unavailable count.  For
simplicity without loss of function, collapse into a general sample table.
X-Info: To unsubscribe, email [email-masked]' with
X-Info: 'unsubscribe frnetmib' in the body of the message.