[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: OID value for columnar objects in a table, order of objects
Hi!
chintan> Is it true that the value of the last component for
chintan> the OID values assigned to the set of columnar objects
chintan> for a table start at one, and are consecutively
chintan> numbered?
Yes, this is common practice and a SHOULD in SMI.
chintan> Also is it mandatory that table, row,
chintan> sequence and columnar objects are followed immediately
chintan> one after another. as per rfc2578 i guess the ordering
chintan> is correct.
The ordering is correct and common practice but not mandatory. I
don't know any reason or MIB example for an exception from this rule.
chintan> eg. xyzTable OBJECT-TYPE
chintan> ....
chintan> ....
chintan> ::= { mib-2 1}
Correct. Tables can be registered at arbitrary not yet allocated OIDs
within your OID namespace. Hence, mib-2.1 would not be valid. Note
that the SYNTAX of a table node must be `SEQUENCE OF xxxEntry'. This
is what makes it a table and expresses the relation to the xxxEntry
row (not the ordering!).
chintan> xyzEntry OBJECT-TYPE
chintan> ....
chintan> ....
chintan> ::= { xyzTable 1}
Correct. The sub-id MUST be 1. The SYNTAX must specifiy the SEQUENCE type,
which should be named xxxEntry und usually immediately follows.
chintan> XyzEntry ::= SEQUENCE {
chintan> xyzobj1 Integer32,
chintan> xyzobj2 Integer32,
chintan> xyzobj3 Integer32
chintan> }
Correct.
chintan> xyzobj1 OBJECT-TYPE
chintan> ....
chintan> ....
chintan> ::= { xyzEntry 1}
chintan> xyzobj2 OBJECT-TYPE
chintan> ....
chintan> ....
chintan> ::= { xyzEntry 2}
chintan> xyzobj3 OBJECT-TYPE
chintan> ....
chintan> ....
chintan> ::= { xyzEntry 3}
Correct. Again, it's not a MUST that the columnar object types
immediately follow the three definitions above. The columnar sub-ids
are usually numbered by small integers starting at 1.
-frank