Subject: Re: question regarding RFC2558

From: Kaj Tesink <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 14:19:38 -0400

At 01:16 PM 10/31/00 -0500, you wrote:

>Kaj:
>
>I am an engineer currently writing a driver for a SONET/SDH interface and 
>I am implementing RFC2558 as a part of that.
>
>I was hoping that you could answer a quick question for me regarding the 
>'sonetXXXXXXXCurrentStatus' objects (sonetSectionCurrentStatus, 
>sonetPathCurrentStatus, etc.).  Are these status fields intended to 
>represent pure defects (which can change in a fraction of a second), or on 
>an integrated defect (for instance, a failure as defined by ANSI 
>T1.231-1997 which would change only over the course of multiple 
>seconds)?  The reason I ask is that RFC2558 makes a clear correlation 
>between the state of the 'sonetXXXXXXXCurrentStatus' fields and the 
>ifOperStatus objects of the ifTable.
>
>So, is the associated ifOperStatus supposed to be allowed to (in a worst 
>case scenario) change multiple times per second, or am I misinterpreting 
>the definition of the current status objects as being pure defects when 
>they really are integrated defects?

the preamble of the mib definition makes a terminology distinction between 
defects and failures
(see e.g., LOS, LOF definitions), and the mib objects are defined in terms 
of defects. so
in the terminology you use above i'd conclude that the objects reflect 
defects and not
integrated defects.

i'll copy this to the atommib mailing list (see
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/atommib-charter.html)
inviting any other implementation experience on this.

kaj

>Thank you very much for time,
>-Ray R Reno
>Senior Software Engineer, Avail Networks
>email:  [email-masked]
>phone:  (734) 332-5563
>fax:      (734) 995-1114

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/

Kaj Tesink
Telcordia Technologies
Email  [email-masked]
Tel    732.758.5254
Fax    732.758.2269
Postal 331 Newman Springs Rd
        Red Bank, NJ 07701
        USA

_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/