[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Fwd: Re: [RMONMIB] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-rmonmib-raqmon-pdu-08.txt]

On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 02:31:35PM -0800, C. M. Heard wrote:
 
> But if you create a table with nothing but INDEX objects for the
> sole purpose of including the values of those objects in a
> notification, then you might as well make all those objects scalars
> with a MAX-ACCESS value of 'accessible-for-notify'.

The scalars will convey the same information. However, the
representation on the wire is different which can have some 
implications:

- notification size (may or may not be an issue)
- ease of programming (when you want to use the already encoded
  index part to go into another table with the same or similar
  index)

Having said this (just for the completeness of the discussion I think
;-), I generally believe that accessible-for-notify is in almost all
cases something to avoid, usually indicating some lack of status
objects that can be polled to detect the same event that the
notification is supposed to communicate. I have not checked the
MIB in question (and do not plan to do so any time soon) but if
we consider adding language to the guidelines explaining how to 
create such accessible-for-notify tables we should also add language
how to avoid such accessible-for-notify tables.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		    International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	    P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany