[Search for users] [Overall Top Noters] [List of all Conferences] [Download this site]

Conference azur::mcc

Title:DECmcc user notes file. Does not replace IPMT.
Notice:Use IPMT for problems. Newsletter location in note 6187
Moderator:TAEC::BEROUD
Created:Mon Aug 21 1989
Last Modified:Wed Jun 04 1997
Last Successful Update:Fri Jun 06 1997
Number of topics:6497
Total number of notes:27359

3440.0. "No Mandatory fields for STATION registration in IMPM" by FOUR62::LICAUSE (Al Licause (338-5661)) Mon Jul 27 1992 14:27

While attempting to register an Ethernet station, in this case, two PC's, under
SSB V1.2 DECmcc for VMS, I noticed that none of the fields in the IMPM is
marked with an asterisk indicating a mandatory field.

Don't you always need to give MCC at least an Ethernet address to allow it
to register a station?

In a the case of the PC's both the ADDRESS and DECnet ADDRESS needed to 
be given since both were running Pathworks.

An error was returned when I tried to register the station w/o entering any
field...."must have address" or some such wording, so I knows what it needs, but
no visual indicator exists!

Al
T.RTitleUserPersonal
Name
DateLines
3440.1Not iconic mapBARREL::LEMMONWed Jul 29 1992 09:285
    The Iconic Map is driven off the dictionary.   The station's 
    management specification should have the "required value" 
    definition if this field is indeed required. 
    
    /Jim
3440.2FOUR62::LICAUSEAl Licause (338-5661)Wed Jul 29 1992 13:355
Okay.....so it is not an IMPM problem.

Anyone from the Data Dictionary or STATION AM group care to comment?

Al
3440.3Why not just QAR it?TOOK::GUERTINIt fall down, go boomWed Jul 29 1992 15:298
    How about if we just QAR that the ENET_AM Management Specification
    Service Interface state that the Address argument on a Register
    Directive have REQUIRED=TRUE?  Although I wouldn't be surprised
    if that was intentionally done (for example to support partial
    registration).
    
    -Matt.
    
3440.4Expected BehaviorLINDAS::SZABIETWed Jul 29 1992 15:4145
    
    
The ADDRESS and ALTERNATE ADDRESS arguments for REGISTER STATION are
intentionally optional.

The Ethernet Station AM's management specification was changed several 
months ago to support 'partial registration'.  One item included in this
task was to change the definition of ADDRESS from required to optional.

While the Ethernet AM needs the ADDRESS argument for the registration 
command to work (since it attempts to communicate with the entity), you 
can force partial registration (override this requirement) by entering 
the value 'PLAN' for the optional OPERATION argument: 

          MCC> REGISTER STATION station_name OPERATION=PLAN

note the value COMPLETE is the default for OPERATION.

So this behavior is expected.

Linda

========================================================================
Examples:
---------

MCC> register station partial operation=plan

Station MOLAR_NS:.partial
AT 29-JUL-1992 14:17:43

Partial registration success. Only the registration name has been registered
with MCC.
MCC> register station partial_too

Station MOLAR_NS:.partial_too
AT 29-JUL-1992 14:18:06

Partial registration success. Please retry later to complete the registration.
        Reason for Partial Registration = Required Argument 'Address' is not
                                          supplied.
MCC> 

    
3440.5FOUR62::LICAUSEAl Licause (338-5661)Thu Jul 30 1992 09:1721
thanks for the explaination.

I hate to read documentation unless forced and in this case, I guess I should
have investigated the OPERATION field a bit more.  Intuitively, PLAN and 
COMPLETE didn't seem to make much sense.  Perhaps if the words chosen could 
have been COMPLETE and PARTIAL, it might have made better sense or just simply
PLANNED.

This seems like another one of those non-intuitive areas that could be 
improved.  

I"ve been told recently that several customers that have piloted MCC have
keep it running, but sort of ignored it.  It takes too much of a persons
time to learn it and turn it into a useful tool.  

I hope we're putting our efforts into making the whole package much more
user friendly and intuitive!!!

Al