Subject: (FRNETMIB) Question regarding RFC 3020 & FRF.16

From: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 10:12:47 -0400

Hi,

In reading FRF.16, RFC 3020 and the various tutorial information, I see no
clear indication as to whether or not the MFR Bundle Link is ever
expected/allowed to be of type ds0Bundle (IfType=82).

While the example conatined in RFC 3020 shows the MFR Bundle Links as being
T1s (ifType=DS1=18), this is just one example and not an exhaustive list of
the expected/possible ifTypes.

Can anyone tell me if MFR Bundle Links can be of ifType ds0Bundle (82)?
Does anyone implement support for them as ds0Bundles?

I'm investigating the enhancement of a legacy device to support FRF.16 and
RFC3020.  This device treats all DS1's as channelized, and implements a
ds0Bundle (ifType=82) as an upper layer on each DS1, even if/when the
ds0Bundle includes all 24 DS0's of the T1.

My concern is that 3rd party SNMP managers may have difficulty managing the
device if the managers were not written to expect MFR Bundle Links of
ifType=ds0Bundle.  Any helpful comments would be appreciated.

Thank you in advance.

Keith Schuettpelz

X-Info: To unsubscribe, email [email-masked]' with
X-Info: 'unsubscribe frnetmib' in the body of the message.

---

From: "Prayson Pate" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 09:07:29 -0400

Keith,

See my comments below.

Prayson Pate
V.P. of Engineering
Overture Networks
[email-masked]
http://www.overturenetworks.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked]
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
> [email-masked]
> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 10:13 AM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: (FRNETMIB) Question regarding RFC 3020 & FRF.16
>
>
> Hi,
>

Section 1.4 of FREF.16 states that a "Physical Link" is
    "A single physical interface that interconnects two devices in a
    frame relay network (e.g. DS1, DS0, Bearer channel, refer to FRF.14)."

Thus any physical interface may be used as a "Physical Link".  A "Bundle
Link" is then defined as
    "A MFR sub-component that controls operation of one of the
    bundle'sphysical links."

This makes it clear that DS0s are perfectly acceptable as Bundle Links.
The intent of FRF.16 was to define a protocol independent of the physical
nature of the underlying transport.  Although not explicitly stated in
FRF.16, it should be possible to implement a Bundle with Bundle Links
of differing physical types.

>
> While the example contained in RFC 3020 shows the MFR Bundle
> Links as being

Correct.  In fact, RFC3020 talks minimally about ifType and relies
on the pre-existing ifTable for definition of interface types.

> Does anyone implement support for them as ds0Bundles?

Lucent's "Lucent’s Enhanced Frame Relay Solutions (EFRS)"
says this about Multilink Frame:

    Lets service providers offer custom fit bandwidth by bundling
    multiple connections at DSO-to-T1/E1 and T1/E1-to-DS3/E3 speeds
    for specific application requirements.

http://www.lucent.com/products/solution/0,,CTID+2011-STID+10077-SOID+614-LOC
L+1,00.html

Tiara's "Multiservice Edge Routers" appear to offer NxDS0 and NxT1
MFR (see http://www.tiaranetworks.com/products/multiserve.html).  At least
two vendors are using DS0s in MFR; other vendors may be doing the same
thing.

> ifType=ds0Bundle.  Any helpful comments would be appreciated.

Most generic SNMP managers (HP OpenView, Castle Rock SNMPc,
Cabletron/Aprisma Spectrum) provide simple MIB browsing, sometimes adding
additional support for very common MIBs, tables or object, such as the
route table, interface table, or RMON objects.  Any advanced treatment of
other tables or objects is usually done by vendor-specific element managers.
I think that you are safe.

> Keith Schuettpelz

Good luck!  Prayson