The MPLS WG Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS WG Archive>month:2002-Jun> msg00159



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

LDP-MIB & VPN-MIB

  • From: "Chung, Li-Jin W, ALCNS" <lic@att.com>
  • Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2002 17:23:42 -0400
  • Cc: "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALASO" <gash@att.com>, "Nguyen, Mai-Uyen T, ALCNS" <mtnguyen@att.com>, "D'Souza, Kevin L, ALCNS" <kld@att.com>, "Lai, Wai S (Waisum), ALASO" <wlai@att.com>
  • Thread-Index: AcIeIOldLhtlIInhEdaBYgAQpK0tbw==
  • Thread-Topic: LDP-MIB & VPN-MIB
  • X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by cell.onecall.net id g5RLMG312111

Hi.,

I am new to this list. So, if what I say here has been addressed by other means please let me know. 
Recently, I have studied draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-mib-08 and  draft-ietf-ppvpn-mpls-vpn-mib-03 and have identified some potential enhancement areas for our future considerations. I would like to get your feedback if these areas of observations make sense to you. 

In the LDP-MIB,
(1) The variables in the following two notifications do not have the information related to the IfIndex in the IF-MIB, this will prolong the proactive fault management cycle time for operators. 
1. mplsLdpSessionUp & 
2. mplsLdpSessionDown 

I would like to suggest to include "mplsLdpConfGenericIfIndexOrZero" or equivalent of such variable in the notification object.

(2)  There is no specification on how to retain the counters when an LDP-entity/session is broken and then reestablished again. Because of such, some implemenation will remove the entire entry statistics when an LDP-session is broken and when the same session is re-established again  the counter will be treated as a new counter. Some accumulation of such old and new counters need to be specified.

In the VPN-MIB,

(1) Although there is a notification  of  VRF maximum route threshold exceeded, there is no counter of number of routes dropped due to such threshold exceeds. I would like to suggest to add a counter of such dropped routes for capacity planning and for threshold tunning. 

(2) From what I can tell, in the route target table, there is no mapping for the associated RD. I would like to suggest to add such association between VRF, RD and RT in the RT table. 

Please let me know if you have any comments.

Thanks,

Li Chung