Re: question on PIB and Counter32/Counter64

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>]

:   In addition to the differential functionality of 'Counter', where 
:   only the difference between two samples generally carries 
:   information, a single value of a 'Usage' attribute usually provides 
:   absolute information, since 
:   - its initial value is known (0) 
:   - no wrap-around events should occur 
:   - the time or event when the initial value was set should be    
:     available directly or indirectly from other objects. 

The statement "no wrap-around events should occur" is
interesting. Does it imply that the box has to turn off itself if you
exceed the range of the type?
    
: I don't agree with that and I worry about them defining Usage32 
: and Usage64 TCs to be used instead of Counter32/64 and/or
: ZeroBasedCounter32/64

We are back to the old discussion. If we accept that they will be
doing monitoring with COPS-PR, then in my view the correct thing would
be to update the SPPI so that it allows the usage of counters.

The alternative would be to say thay have to use SNMP for monitoring,
but which is a real pain if you do use COPS-PR (just thing alone about
the different ways to manage security). So we would just get lots of
heat and finally the stuff would be defined in enterprise PIBs - not
any better.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder    <http://www.informatik.uni-osnabrueck.de/schoenw/>