Re: Question about IPv6 Management

Eric,
      Take a look at the following:

draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2096-update-02.txt
draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2013-update-00.txt
draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2012-update-02.txt
draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2011-update-02.txt

Regards,
Brian

EricLKlein wrote:
> Thank you. I have been reading:
> RFC 2452 IP v6 MIB for the TCP
> 
> RFC 2454 IP v6 MIB for the UDP
> 
> RFC 2466 MIB for IP v6 ICMP 
> 
> But didn't see anything more detailed. Thanks for the information.
> Eric
>   ----- Original Message ----- 
>   From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) 
>   To: EricLKlein ; [email protected] ; [email protected] ; [email protected] 
>   Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 2:48 AM
>   Subject: RE: Question about IPv6 Management
> 
> 
>   We have been defining a number of things so that IP (or better Internet) addresses
>   can be represented in an IPversion neutral matter. See for example RFC3291.
> 
>   We are checking all MIB modules to be IPv4 and IPv6 capable (unless a module
>   is for one specific IP version). 
> 
>   We have defined TCs so that we also have IPv6 transport addresses so that 
>   SNMP can go over IPv6. See RFC3419
> 
>   Various MIB modules are being reqorked in the IPv6 WG 
> 
>   Hope this helps
>   Thanks,Bert 
> 
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: EricLKlein [mailto:[email protected]]
>     Sent: zondag 16 maart 2003 11:19
>     To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
>     Subject: Question about IPv6 Management
> 
> 
>     I appologize, this is being possted to multiple WG's as it seems to cross areas.
> 
>     Is there any information about the requirment changes in the Network Management Systems (NMS) or Operations Support Systems (OSS) necesary to support IPv6?
> 
>     I have looked at the various MIB RFC's and such, but can not find anything more than you need bigger address support and some SNMPv2 compliance.
> 
>     This seems too simple to me.
> 
>      Eric
>