> > >From: "t.petch" <[email protected]> > > >SNMP has never > > >said much about persistence (table row status being the exception). > > > > You seem to have overlooked the StorageType textual convention > > from RFC 2579. It's fairly widely used. > > Randy, > > No, not overlooked, just referred to in common parlance as > 'table row status '. > > OK, I might have said > 'the StorageType textual convention from RFC2579' > but thought the colloquialism would be easier to understand > in this context.
Having coded my fair share of SNMP agents, my understanding was what Randy's Tom. Tables have both a row status and a storage type object typically. Table row status, when one codes that state machine, was about from the agent's cache to some other part of the system outside the agent passing the appropriate StorageType flag or othwerise writing that bit of config to persistent store. So StorageType is often used with but not the same thing as RowStatus. And yes that model, per row, was alot of state to maintain, RFC 3514. I had some notes on using it in RFC 3512 http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3512#section-3.8.2 Mike _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
