Subject: RE: [VRRP] VRRP MIB(s) - some questions and request for comments

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 17:45:06 -0700

hi, 
The bottom line question here is:

Do we envision having managed objects that are VRRP-IP version independent?
i.e., at the configuration/monitoring level user/administrator is looking at VRRP and not VRRP-IPv4 and VRRP-IPv6? 

Do we think that one definition of "invalidVRID" (as an example) 
is good enough to specify invalidVRIDs on both VRRP-IPv4 and VRRP-IPv6 
protocols in a mixed environment? If we *do not* need the granularity 
to define per protocol basis, then extending the existing definition 
to include VRRP-IPv6 is the way to go (and hence have one MIB).

I think that we will require the granularity of configuration objects
at protocol level (to debug misconfigurations for example), Which means
that we need to put in protocol version for all the common objects to 
distinguish between two protocols.

Please note that there are a number of differences between the two 
protocols too. Which means that we would have to define some of the 
parameters that apply for VRRP-IPv4 only and some for VRRP-IPv6 only.

Defining one MIB means:
- No backward compatibility (the new MIB structure will have to be 
different from the existing structure)
- The MIB will have protocol version specific objects that apply 
to only one particular protocol any way.

From the development point of view, I think VRRP-IPv6 will be implemented 
separate from the VRRP-IPv4 implementation, which means that it is easier to implement a separate new MIB than to change existing MIB implementation 
(well this is debatable - I know..)

Thanks
kalyan

Radia Perlman - Boston Center for Networking wrote:

>Re: one MIB for IPv4+IPv6 that would obsolete the current IPv4-only,
>or two MIBs, one for IPv4-only, and one for IPv6-only:
>
>It would be good if someone would ask Bert Wijnen his opinion on this.
>
>And a question...are we assuming the existence of mixed-IPv4/IPv6 VRRP
>environments? (as in, might a single router be simultaneously involved
>in an IPv4 and an IPv6 election)? 
>
Some of the Ericsson solutions do envision the existence of 
mixed-IPv4/IPv-6 VRRP environments.

>If so, that might argue for being
>one MIB. I think the authors (and others) have made good cases for
>2 documents forever (rather than temporarily V4-only, to be obsoleted).
>But I got the impression that Bert Wijnen would prefer a single document.
>
>Radia
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>vrrp mailing list
>[email-masked]
>https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp
>
>  
>

-- 
Vikram Pendharkar			
Ericsson IP Infrastructure

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