| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 4799.1 | reason code undefined | TOOK::S_KO | Hoot mon! | Fri Apr 02 1993 16:24 | 4 |
|
Ring error reason 240 is not defined in the MSL. The PM is reporting
that it cannot find the information in the dictionary to format the
output (the code is translated to a text string).
|
| 4799.2 | Data type problem ? | PRSSOS::BONNAFE | Guy BONNAFE - CSC France | Tue Apr 06 1993 06:39 | 14 |
|
Thanks for your reply Stella.
My feeling is that the way to encode 'ring error reason' attribute is
different for DECnis and DECmcc softwares. Combination of set bits in
DECnis and enumeration data type for DECmcc. So 240 could be a
combination of bit 9 and bit 6 from one part and nothing to the other.
It would be interesting to have a DECnis/FDDI/CMIP specialist advice
on this.
Guy.
|
| 4799.3 | | TOOK::PURRETTA | | Tue Apr 06 1993 09:52 | 3 |
| It looks like the DECnis is treating this attribute as a bitset
but the DSSR registered definition is of type enumeration.
I'll send mail to a DECnis engineer and see what he says.
|
| 4799.4 | Not as subtle as that | MARVIN::COBB | Graham R. Cobb (DECNIS development), REO2-G/G9, 830-3917 | Wed Apr 07 1993 09:05 | 12 |
| We are just returning rubbish for this attribute. A value returned by the
device firmware is making its way all the way up to network management with
no piece of code mapping it into the architected values. In fact, it looks
like we are not even using the right field of the data structure the device
provides! It appears that the value we return is always either 0 or 240.
Expect a fix in DECNIS V2.2. If you want to track progress yourself, enter
a DECNIS QAR. If you have a customer who *needs* a fix sooner than DECNIS
V2.2 (summer) you will need to raise a CLD against DECNIS.
Thanks for reporting this.
Graham
|
| 4799.5 | | TOOK::PURRETTA | | Wed Apr 07 1993 10:01 | 3 |
| Thanks for taking the time to look into this Graham.
jp
|