Subject: RE: [VRRP] status of draft-ietf-vrrp-unified-mib-06.txt

From: "Carl Kalbfleisch" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 14 Jan 2007 22:57:00 -0600

Joan,

Thanks for your response. There is not a particular stat in question. It was just to try to save some development time. Will try to get the stats implemented.

Carl

-----Original Message-----
From:	Joan Cucchiara [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent:	Sun 1/14/2007 5:00 PM
To:	Carl Kalbfleisch; [email-masked]
Cc:	Joan Cucchiara
Subject:	Re: [VRRP] status of draft-ietf-vrrp-unified-mib-06.txt

Hi Carl,

Thanks for pointing out that there is now a version 6.
I didn't see the announcement.  I did a MIB Dr. review
of version 5, so will take a look at version 6 also.

My comments are inline below, prefaced with Joan:

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Carl Kalbfleisch" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:04 PM
Subject: [VRRP] status of draft-ietf-vrrp-unified-mib-06.txt

What is the status of draft-ietf-vrrp-unified-mib-06.txt?

Joan:  It is in the process of the MIB Dr. review.  As stated above,
Joan:  version 6 is recent and will be reviewed.
Joan:  Comments on version 5 were in the June, July and Oct 2006 timeframe

I am interested in implementing this in a product and have a couple 
comments.

1) is it possible to add a vrrpStateChange notification or a notification 
for each state. Our requirements require notification from a device when it 
EXITS master state. Currently the vrrpTrapNewMaster only indicates when the 
system goes into the master state. Having an indication of backup and 
initialization states as notifications allows the management station to 
correlate when the state changes without polling.

Joan:  If the working group is interested in adding this, then I wouldn't be 
against it.

2) is it possible to create an additional conformance statement without the 
statistics group. This would simply make it easier to implement a read-only 
agent implementation.

Joan:  I would advise against this.  These statistics for the ReadOnly 
conformance are informative.  Yes, it would make
Joan: the implementation easier, but these statistics give much information 
and should be supported for
Joan: a readonly conformance in my opinion.  Is there a specific statistic 
or statistics that are an issue?

-Thanks,
  Joan

Thanks,
Carl

_______________________________________________
vrrp mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp 

_______________________________________________
vrrp mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 19:03:35 -0600

Hi,
	Sorry for the delay, I was out of country  for the past two
months (with limited email access).

	Thanks Joan for the reply. Sorry I missed informing you about
the draft. I was in a hurry to
	submit it before leaving and missed emailing you.

1) is it possible to add a vrrpStateChange notification or a
notification 
for each state. Our requirements require notification from a device when
it 
EXITS master state. Currently the vrrpTrapNewMaster only indicates when
the 
system goes into the master state. Having an indication of backup and 
initialization states as notifications allows the management station to 
correlate when the state changes without polling.

Kalyan:   Management stations cannot rely on receiving a trap indicating
that master is EXITing the 
state - for example some one tripped over power cable or even when the
interface goes down. 
Please correct me if that is not true.

On the other hand, As Carl mentioned in another offline mail (included
below), Just a generic state change trap 
might be useful. I do remember some discussion during the introduction
of 'vrrpNewMasterReason' but could not find  in the mailing list
archive. Anyone in the mailing list have a memory of this? 

I am tempted to think that a generic state change might be a good idea
but am not convinced that management
stations can rely on trap to indicate the current state (other than the
state change to master) with out polling.

Let us discuss this and I will change the draft as decided by the
working group.

2) is it possible to create an additional conformance statement without
the 
statistics group. This would simply make it easier to implement a
read-only 
agent implementation.

- As Joan indicated, I think these statistics are important even for a
basic readonly implementation.

Following is Carl's mail :
---------

I'd like to see the following notification added to the MIB:

vrrpStateChange NOTIFICATION-TYPE
  OBJECTS { vrrpOperationsMasterIpAddr, vrrpOperationsState,
vrrpStateChangeReason }
  STATUS current
  DESCRIPTION
    "Notification of VRRP state change."
::= { vrrpNotifications 4 }

Would need to define the vrrpStateChangeReason as well. This could
replace the New Master notification or be in addition to it. The idea is
that we would then get notification of all state changes. An NMS would
use this information to clear alerts from previous notifications.
Without it there is no asynchronous way to know of all state changes.

Please let me know what you think.
-------------

Thanks,
Kalyan

-----Original Message-----
From: ext Carl Kalbfleisch [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Sunday, January 14, 2007 8:57 PM
To: Joan Cucchiara; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: [VRRP] status of draft-ietf-vrrp-unified-mib-06.txt

Joan,

Thanks for your response. There is not a particular stat in question. It
was just to try to save some development time. Will try to get the stats
implemented.

Carl

-----Original Message-----
From:	Joan Cucchiara [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent:	Sun 1/14/2007 5:00 PM
To:	Carl Kalbfleisch; [email-masked]
Cc:	Joan Cucchiara
Subject:	Re: [VRRP] status of draft-ietf-vrrp-unified-mib-06.txt

Hi Carl,

Thanks for pointing out that there is now a version 6.
I didn't see the announcement.  I did a MIB Dr. review of version 5, so
will take a look at version 6 also.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Kalbfleisch" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 6:04 PM
Subject: [VRRP] status of draft-ietf-vrrp-unified-mib-06.txt

Joan:  It is in the process of the MIB Dr. review.  As stated above,
Joan:  version 6 is recent and will be reviewed.
Joan:  Comments on version 5 were in the June, July and Oct 2006
timeframe

1) is it possible to add a vrrpStateChange notification or a
notification 
for each state. Our requirements require notification from a device when
it 
EXITS master state. Currently the vrrpTrapNewMaster only indicates when
the 
system goes into the master state. Having an indication of backup and 
initialization states as notifications allows the management station to 
correlate when the state changes without polling.

Joan:  If the working group is interested in adding this, then I
wouldn't be 
against it.

2) is it possible to create an additional conformance statement without
the 
statistics group. This would simply make it easier to implement a
read-only 
agent implementation.

Joan:  I would advise against this.  These statistics for the ReadOnly 
conformance are informative.  Yes, it would make
Joan: the implementation easier, but these statistics give much
information 
and should be supported for
Joan: a readonly conformance in my opinion.  Is there a specific
statistic 
or statistics that are an issue?

-Thanks,
  Joan

Thanks,
Carl