Subject: [ANCP] Questions regarding ANCP MIB ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity

From: James Huang <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:29:49 +0800

Hi, all,

I have some questions about the implementation of ANCP MIB item
ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity; can anybody give me some idea? Thanks in
advance!

http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ancp-mib-an-04

 ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity OBJECT-TYPE

       SYNTAX      RowPointer

       MAX-ACCESS  read-create

       STATUS      current

       DESCRIPTION

             "This object contains the name of an object instance

              uniquely identifying a lower layer entity associated

              with this session.  For example, in the case where

              the session is associated with an ATM VCC, this object

              might be set to an object identifier uniquely identifying

              that VCC (e.g., an object instance in atmVclTable).

              If unused, this object MUST have the value zeroDotZero.

              The value of this object is persistent."

       DEFVAL { zeroDotZero }

       ::= { ancpAnSessionConfigEntry 16 }

Question:

1.    "a lower layer entity associated with this session"

What is the association between a lower layer entity and an ANCP session? Is
it associated with partition id?

What is the application scenario for this?

2.    what is the format of the name/identifier

"Access-Node-Identifier atm slot/port:vpi.vci", which is defined in TR-101,
or an index, i.e. an index of the atmVclTable?

Best Regards

James

---

From: Moti Morgenstern <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:55:27 +0200

Hi James,

The ANCP session is always associated with some lower-layer entity, e.g., a virtual bridge port, an ATM VCC, Ethernet interface, etc.
Notice that each one of the "lower-layer" entities listed here has a different identifier-type. The bridge port has a port id, the VCC is identified by (ifIndex, VPI, VCI) and the Ethernet interface has a unique ifIndex value.
So, the value in ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity is the SNMP Object ID that uniquely identifies the associated lower-layer entity.
The format is therefore, as you understand, an index into another SNMP table.

Regards,
Moti Morgenstern
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of James Huang
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 8:30 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ANCP] Questions regarding ANCP MIB ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity

Hi, all,

I have some questions about the implementation of ANCP MIB item ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity; can anybody give me some idea? Thanks in advance!

Question:
1.  "a lower layer entity associated with this session"
What is the association between a lower layer entity and an ANCP session? Is it associated with partition id?
What is the application scenario for this?

2.  what is the format of the name/identifier
"Access-Node-Identifier atm slot/port:vpi.vci", which is defined in TR-101, or an index, i.e. an index of the atmVclTable?

Best Regards
James

---

From: James Huang <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 15:58:44 +0800

Hi, Moti,

Do you mean we should specify which lower-layer entity should be used to
transmit ANCP message by using ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity?

If yes, then what is the difference between
ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedInterface    and ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity,
as shown below? I think they both specify an interface in case of Ethernet,
it is duplicated.

                   ……            (taken from draft-ietf-ancp-mib-an-04 )

                   ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedInterface      InterfaceIndex,

                   ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity            RowPointer,

                   ancpAnSessionConfigSvid
VlanIdOrNone,

                   ……

BTW, when creating an ANCP session, we need to specify the IP addr of the
ANCP server – BRAS; that would be sufficient; what is the point to specify
the lower-layer entity? The AN should choose the lower-layer entity itself.

Thanks!

Best Regards

James

  _____  

发件人: Moti Morgenstern [mailto:[email-masked]] 
发送时间: 2009年11月12日 14:55
收件人: James Huang
抄送: [email-masked]
主题: RE: [ANCP] Questions regarding ANCP MIB
ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity

Hi James,

The ANCP session is always associated with some lower-layer entity, e.g., a
virtual bridge port, an ATM VCC, Ethernet interface, etc.

Notice that each one of the “lower-layer” entities listed here has a
different identifier-type. The bridge port has a port id, the VCC is
identified by (ifIndex, VPI, VCI) and the Ethernet interface has a unique
ifIndex value.

So, the value in ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity is the SNMP Object ID that
uniquely identifies the associated lower-layer entity.

The format is therefore, as you understand, an index into another SNMP
table. 

Regards,

Moti Morgenstern

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
James Huang
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 8:30 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [ANCP] Questions regarding ANCP MIB
ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity

Hi, all,

       SYNTAX      RowPointer

       MAX-ACCESS  read-create

       STATUS      current

       DESCRIPTION

       DEFVAL { zeroDotZero }

Question:

1.    “a lower layer entity associated with this session”

Best Regards

James

---

From: "DE CNODDER Stefaan" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 10:09:40 +0100

Hi James,

Some replies below

________________________________

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of James Huang
Sent: donderdag 12 november 2009 8:59
To: 'Moti Morgenstern'
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: [ANCP] Questions regarding ANCP MIB ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity

Hi, Moti,

Do you mean we should specify which lower-layer entity should be used to transmit ANCP message by using ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity?

If yes, then what is the difference between ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedInterface    and ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity, as shown below? I think they both specify an interface in case of Ethernet, it is duplicated.

[Stefaan] Not only Ethernet is covered but also ATM

                   ancpAnSessionConfigSvid                                VlanIdOrNone,

                   ……

BTW, when creating an ANCP session, we need to specify the IP addr of the ANCP server – BRAS; that would be sufficient; what is the point to specify the lower-layer entity? The AN should choose the lower-layer entity itself.

[Stefaan] these MIB objects have been added since version 02 of the draft based on a discussion in February last year.  In principle just specifying the IP address of the NAS is sufficient but some people preferred to also explicitly configure the underlying interface (VLAN, PVC, ...).  The discussion last year started with this message http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ancp/current/msg00484.html <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ancp/current/msg00484.html>  

regards,

Stefaan

Thanks!

Best Regards

James

________________________________

发件人: Moti Morgenstern [mailto:[email-masked]] 
发送时间: 2009年11月12日 14:55
收件人: James Huang
抄送: [email-masked]
主题: RE: [ANCP] Questions regarding ANCP MIB ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity

Hi James,

Notice that each one of the “lower-layer” entities listed here has a different identifier-type. The bridge port has a port id, the VCC is identified by (ifIndex, VPI, VCI) and the Ethernet interface has a unique ifIndex value.

Regards,

Moti Morgenstern

Hi, all,

       SYNTAX      RowPointer

       MAX-ACCESS  read-create

       STATUS      current

       DESCRIPTION

       DEFVAL { zeroDotZero }

Question:

Best Regards

James

---

From: Moti Morgenstern <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 11:29:49 +0200

Hi James,

See embedded answer.

Regards, Moti

From: James Huang [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 9:59 AM
To: Moti Morgenstern
Cc: [email-masked]; 'wangyiming'; 'Tina TSOU'; 'Fortune HUANG'
Subject: [ANCP] Questions regarding ANCP MIB ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity

Hi, Moti,

Do you mean we should specify which lower-layer entity should be used to transmit ANCP message by using ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity?
If yes, then what is the difference between ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedInterface    and ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity, as shown below? I think they both specify an interface in case of Ethernet, it is duplicated.
[MM] Please look into RFC4188 (BRIDGE-MIB) where we have a very similar issue. In case the bridge port is associated with an ifIndex then dot1dBasePortIfIndex is enough but if not then dot1dBasePortCircuit is required. In our case, if the ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedInterface then the other objects can be left unused. However, sometimes you need to specify also the S-VLAN ID.

Best Regards
James

Hi James,

Regards,
Moti Morgenstern

Hi, all,

Question:

Best Regards
James

---

From: James Huang <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:48:07 +0800

Hi, stefaan,

I have read the discussion thread carefully.

In my understanding, in the case of Ethernet, when configuring an ANCP
session in the AN, the steps should be followed:

1.     specify which should be used by ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedInterface

2.     specify which VLAN should be used.

If the VLAN does not exist, it should be created; and an IP address should
be assigned to this VLAN interface, which would be used as the 

Source IP address in the ANCP packets; and also a routing table should be
added if necessary.

Is this correct?

But I still do not get the point why we should specify the layer2 interface,
although it is also defined in the ANCP framework.

Thanks!

Best Regards

James

  _____  

发件人: DE CNODDER Stefaan [mailto:[email-masked]] 
发送时间: 2009年11月12日 17:10
收件人: James Huang; Moti Morgenstern
抄送: [email-masked]
主题: RE: [ANCP] Questions regarding ANCP MIB
ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity

Hi James,

Some replies below

  _____  

Hi, Moti,

                   ancpAnSessionConfigSvid
VlanIdOrNone,

                   ……

[Stefaan] these MIB objects have been added since version 02 of the draft
based on a discussion in February last year.  In principle just specifying
the IP address of the NAS is sufficient but some people preferred to also
explicitly configure the underlying interface (VLAN, PVC, ...).  The
discussion last year started with this message
<http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ancp/current/msg00484.html>
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ancp/current/msg00484.html 

regards,

Stefaan

Thanks!

Best Regards

James

  _____  

Hi James,

Regards,

Moti Morgenstern

Hi, all,

       SYNTAX      RowPointer

       MAX-ACCESS  read-create

       STATUS      current

       DESCRIPTION

       DEFVAL { zeroDotZero }

Question:

Best Regards

James

---

From: Moti Morgenstern <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:53:30 +0200

Hi James,

See my embedded remarks.

Regards,
Moti Morgenstern

From: James Huang [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2009 4:48 AM
To: 'DE CNODDER Stefaan'; Moti Morgenstern
Cc: [email-masked]; 'wangyiming'; 'Tina TSOU'
Subject: 答复: [ANCP] Questions regarding ANCP MIB ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity

Hi, stefaan,

I have read the discussion thread carefully.
In my understanding, in the case of Ethernet, when configuring an ANCP session in the AN, the steps should be followed:
1.       specify which should be used by ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedInterface
[MM] If the session is not associated with an entity that is identified solely by an ifIndex the ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity should be used instead (or as well, depending on the specific case).
2.       specify which VLAN should be used.
If the VLAN does not exist, it should be created; and an IP address should be assigned to this VLAN interface, which would be used as the
Source IP address in the ANCP packets; and also a routing table should be added if necessary.
[MM] The management model only allows you to indicate that a session is associated with S-VLAN (or both S- and C-VLAN). It currently does not refer to questions like “What if the VLAN does not exist?”, “How is the MSAN’s IP address for each session specified?”, etc.

Is this correct?

But I still do not get the point why we should specify the layer2 interface, although it is also defined in the ANCP framework.
[MM] I’m not sure I understand what you mean, so I’ll try to repeat what I already wrote. The ANCP session may “ride over” various interfaces/entities. Sometimes such an interface has simply an ifIndex pattern but sometimes not. One example is the ATM VCC but it’s only an example.

Thanks!

Best Regards
James

Hi James,

Some replies below

Hi, Moti,

[Stefaan] these MIB objects have been added since version 02 of the draft based on a discussion in February last year.  In principle just specifying the IP address of the NAS is sufficient but some people preferred to also explicitly configure the underlying interface (VLAN, PVC, ...).  The discussion last year started with this message http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ancp/current/msg00484.html

regards,
Stefaan

Thanks!

Best Regards
James

Hi James,

Regards,
Moti Morgenstern

Hi, all,

Question:

Best Regards
James

---

From: "Wojciech Dec (wdec)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 15:28:12 +0100

Hi James,
 
your observation is correct and points to a topic that was discussed at some stage, although unfortunately the framework was never corrected: As ANCP is an IP protocol, designating a VLAN is rather pointless. The task of configuring an IP interface, which could be used for ANCP traffic along and a VLAN for that interface is not ANCP's role and IMO should not be reflected in the MIBs by other means that having ANCP reference an existing IP interface (which may in turn have a VLAN).
 
Given that the ANCP MIB document is sorely needing review (it cannot progress further without a more complete WG review), we would welcome your feedback and suggestions for improvement.
 
Thanks,
Woj.

	From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of James Huang
	Sent: 13 November 2009 03:48
	To: 'DE CNODDER Stefaan'; 'Moti Morgenstern'
	Cc: [email-masked]
	Subject: [ANCP] ??: Questions regarding ANCP MIB ancpAnSessionConfigRelatedEntity

	Hi, stefaan,

	Is this correct?

	Thanks!

	Best Regards

	James

	 

	Hi James,

	Some replies below

	Hi, Moti,

	                   ……

	regards,

	Stefaan

	Thanks!

	Best Regards

	James

	Hi James,

	Regards,

	Moti Morgenstern

	Hi, all,

	       SYNTAX      RowPointer

	       MAX-ACCESS  read-create

	       STATUS      current

	       DESCRIPTION

	       DEFVAL { zeroDotZero }

	Question:

	Best Regards

	James