Re: FW: Static fdb table in q-bridge MIB?

The dot1dStaticTable was replaced in the q-bridge mib with two tables:
dot1qStaticUnicastTable and dot1qStaticMulticastTable.  The reason for
this is because the definitions of these tables in the 802.1Q spec had
different indices.  The unicast table is indexed by FDB ID, the
multicast table is indexed by VLAN ID.  Both of these tables are
defined in RFC 4363.

Les...


On 17/04/07, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Levi [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 8:38 PM
> To: Glenn Parsons; Paul Bottorff; Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Wijnen, Bert
> (Bert)
> Subject: Static fdb table in q-bridge MIB?
>
> Hi All,
>
> I was just about to make an update to the table for defining static fdb
> entries in the new q-bridge MIB based on .1ah clause 12.7.7.  However,
> there is no such table either in the new MIB, nor in the q-bridge MIB
> from RFC 4363.  However, in RFC 4363, there is a reference to an object
> called 'dot1qStaticAddress' in the DESCRIPTION of dot1qTpFdbStatus in
> the dot1qTpFdbTable.  Does anybody know if there is a reason why there
> is no such table in RFC 4363?  Does it make sense to add such a table in
> the new q-bridge MIB?
>
> Note that there is an equivalent table in the original bridge-mib,
> called the dot1dStaticTable.  Of course, that table doesn't have a fid
> in the index.  Seems like that table was lost in the translation to the
> q-bridge mib.
>
> -Dave
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> David B. Levi             Nortel Networks    [email protected]
> Voice: +1 408 495 5138    ESN: 265-5138
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bridge-mib mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bridge-mib
>