| Bill,
I am currently investigating a similar problem on a customer
site, but only for a DECconcentrator 500 running v.3.2.1
This customer is monitoring his FDDI network using OpenView.
On a first site, he has 4 x DECconcentrator 500 v.3.1 and DECbridge
5xx/6xx v.1.2B. He never has problem on this site.
Then, we installed a second site with DECconcentrator 500 v.3.2.1
and DECbridge 5xx/6xx v.1.2B. He started to complain about CFstate
status toggling between 12 and an other value on DECconcentrator 500
(and only on them).
First, I checked the value of snmpFddiSMTCFState in RFC1285 and
the value of FddiSMTCFState in FDDI SMT 7.2. It appears there is
new values defined in FDDI SMT 7.2 as described below :
RFC1285 snmpFddiSMTCFState
--------------------------
cf0(1), -- Isolated
cf1(2), -- Wrap_S
cf2(3), -- Wrap_A
cf3(4), -- Wrap_B
cf4(5), -- Wrap_AB
cf5(6) -- Thru
FDDI SMT v.7.2 FddiSMTCFState
-----------------------------
cf0, -- Isolated
cf1, -- local_a
cf2, -- local_b
cf3, -- local_ab
cf4, -- local_s
cf5, -- wrap_a
cf6, -- wrap_b
cf7, -- wrap_ab
cf8, -- wrap_s
cf9, -- c_wrap_a
cf10, -- c_wrap_b
cf11, -- c_wrap_s
cf12, -- thru
I downgraded DECconcentrator 500 from v.3.2.1 to v.3.1,
and the problem disappeared. So, now I need to find if the problem
is coming from our firmware which implement SMT 7.2 as well as
RFC1285 or from the OpenView software.
Hope this help
Patrick
|
| Actually, Patrick, RFC1512 was recently released. I've included the
information that Anil Rijsinghani sent out recently.
- Larry
From: LEVERS::ANIL "Anil Rijsinghani 10-Sep-1993 1939" 10-SEP-1993 20:21:43.36
To: @FDDI-MIB-INTEREST
CC:
Subj: RFC-1512 on FDDI MIB (based on SMT 7.3)
The new FDDI MIB based on SMT 7.3 (technically the same as
SMT 7.2, only editorial changes) has been published as RFC-1512, a
Proposed Standard. Since RFC-1285, which was based on SMT 6.2,
a few objects have been deleted, more have been added, and units
for several objects have changed.
All of our FDDI products need to implement this MIB for full 7.2
management, in combination with the extended fddi group in the
DEC ELAN Vendor MIB.
Anil
------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Sep 93 12:13:38 PDT
From: "Joyce K. Reynolds" <[email protected]>
To: IETF-Announce:;@us1rmc.bb.dec.com
Subject: RFC1512 on FDDI MIB
Cc: [email protected]
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries.
RFC 1512:
Title: FDDI Management Information Base
Author: J. Case & A. Rijsinghani
Mailbox: [email protected], [email protected]
Pages: 51
Characters: 108,589
Updates: 1285
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
for use with network management protocols in TCP/IP-based internets.
In particular, it defines objects for managing devices which implement
the FDDI based on the ANSI FDDI SMT 7.3 draft standard, which has been
forwarded for publication by the X3T9.5 committee. This memo is a
product of the FDDI MIB Working Group of the IETF.
This is a Proposed Standard Protocol.
This RFC specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" for the standardization state and status
of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list.
Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list
should be sent to [email protected]. Requests to be added
to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to
[email protected].
Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending
an EMAIL message to "[email protected]" with the message body
"help: ways_to_get_rfcs". For example:
To: [email protected]
Subject: getting rfcs
help: ways_to_get_rfcs
Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the
author of the RFC in question, or to [email protected]. Unless
specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for
unlimited distribution.
Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to
[email protected]. Please consult RFC 1111, "Instructions to RFC
Authors", for further information.
Joyce K. Reynolds
USC/Information Sciences Institute
|