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
-------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
