Subject: RE: ARC MIB Improvement

From: Dan Romascanu <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 19:59:16 +0200

Hi Tammy,

I do not understand well this scheme. What is a 'subset'?  Why seven? maybe
it is too little, or too many... How are 'subsets' defined?

Thanks and Regards,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Tammy Ferris [SMTP:[email-masked]]
> Sent:	Mon March 26 2001 17:12
> To:	Huynh, An-Ni (Anni)
> Cc:	[email-masked]'
> Subject:	Re: ARC MIB Improvement
> 
> 
> An-Ni,
> How about something like the following:
> alarmSet OBJECT-TYPE  SYNTAX  INTEGER    {
>               allAlarms (0),
>               alarmSubset1 (1),
>               alarmSubset2 (2),
>               alarmSubset3 (3),
>               alarmSubset4 (4),
>               alarmSubset5 (5),
>               alarmSubset6 (6),
>               alarmSubset7 (7)
>               }
>       MAX-ACCESS read-write
>       STATUS       current
>       DESCRIPTION
>                " Identifies the set of alarms to be controlled."
>        ::= { TBD TBD }
> 
> With the above, there is still the flexibility to configure a subset.  How
> this
> configuration occurs could be left out of the standard or a generic way
> specified.
> 
> What do you think?
> Tammy
> 
> "Huynh, An-Ni (Anni)" wrote:
> 
> > Tammy:
> >
> >         This makes a big difference!!!
> >         So, when ARC is activated to an managed entity (resource), all
> > associated alarms are
> >         suppressed/deferred.
> >
> >         Is there any need to have ARC per alarm types?  Can we eliminate
> > this?
> >
> > Anni
> > > ----------
> > > From:         Tammy Ferris[SMTP:[email-masked]]
> > > Sent:         Friday, March 23, 2001 10:09 PM
> > > Cc:   [email-masked]'
> > > Subject:      Re: ARC MIB Improvement
> > >
> > >
> > > Kam,
> > > I would like some way to specify "all" alarm types which is the
> default
> > > and
> > > expected to be the most typical setting for ARC  and also better
> matches
> > > the ITU
> > >
> > > model.
> > > Tammy
> > >
> > > "Lam, Hing-Kam (Kam)" wrote:
> > >
> > > > All,
> > > >
> > > > At the end of the ARC MIB presentation on Monday (3/19), I briefly
> > > mentioned
> > > > about the possible improvement of the MIB but didn't have time to go
> > > into
> > > > details. Here are the details of improving the 00 version (
> > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lam-disman-arcmib-00.txt
> ).
> > > >
> > > > (1) As Dave suggested before, the ARC table will only have rows with
> ARC
> > > > state values other than ALM. That is, once a resource transitions
> from a
> > > ARC
> > > > mode state (i.e., NALM, NALM-QI[-CD], or NALM-TI) to the ALM state,
> the
> > > > entry will be deleted automatically from the ARC table.
> > > >
> > > > (2) Remove the arcNalmTITimeInterval and the arcNalmCDTimeInterval
> > > objects
> > > > to outside of the ARC table. Outside of the table allows these two
> > > interval
> > > > to be used as default values for all applicable resoruces. In this
> way,
> > > the
> > > > ARC table will be reduced from 6 columns to 4 columns only. The 4
> > > columns
> > > > are arcIndex (identifying the resource), arcAlarmType (i.e., the
> > > condition
> > > > to be controlled, e.g., LOS), arcState (NALM, NALM-TI, or NALM-QI),
> and
> > > > arcNalmTimeRemainding.
> > > > At the creation of an ARC entry for a resource, the initial value
> for
> > > > arcNalmTimeRemainding will be the value of arcNalmTITimeInterval (if
> the
> > > ARC
> > > > state is NALM-TI) or arcNalmCDTimeInterval (if the ARC state is
> NALM-QI)
> > > or
> > > > zero (if the ARC state is NALM).
> > > > On the other, at the creation of an ARC entry, the manager may
> specify a
> > > > value for arcNalmTimeRemainding to override the default value, if
> > > needed.
> > > > This change will make the table smaller and also avoid holes in the
> > > table if
> > > > TI and QI are not supported for a resource.
> > > >
> > > > (3) Change the arcNalmTimeRemainding object from read-only to
> > > read-write.
> > > > This will allow the manager to increase or decrease the value when
> the
> > > > resource is in the NALM-TI or the NALM-QI-CD (if supported) state.
> This
> > > is
> > > > particularly useful in the case of performing maintenance on the
> > > resource
> > > > when the technician needs to increase or decrease the allowed time.
> > > >
> > > > I believe that (1) will make the ARC MIB scale better. (2) will
> simplify
> > > the
> > > > MIB. Both (2) and (3) meet the ARC requirements better.
> > > > Any comments?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Kam
> > >