So, in other words, you are implying that a boolean value should be added to each PIB PRC to specify whether or not to count? I see the use; however, I do not think it is applicable to the Diffserv PIB since a counter is not a specific piece of QoS information. I would recommend adding it to the Framework PIB (for example, add a boolean value to the frwkPrcSupport PRC) if it is added to a PIB at all.
Tina Iliff
-----Original Message-----
From: Joel M. Halpern [mailto:joel@longsys.com]
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2001 10:00 AM
To: diffserv@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [Diffserv] CountActTable
There are no defined implicit count actions. The point of including the
actions explicitily in the MIB / Model (and presumably PIB) is that
depending upon the particular usage intended by the administrator, one may
want to count at different points. The Count Actions define where counting
is done.
Yours,
Joel M. Halpern
At 01:45 PM 4/6/01 +0000, Iliff, Tina wrote:
>However, it seems logical that the count action would be implicit and
>therefore, does not need configuration parameters within a policy
>set. For example, if the Accounting Timer is set, then the PEP should
>"turn on" its counters; otherwise, the counters are "disabled".
>
>Tina Iliff
>-----Original Message----- From: Joel M. Halpern
>[<mailto:joel@longsys.com>mailto:joel@longsys.com] Sent: Wednesday,
>April 04, 2001 12:14 PM To: diffserv@ietf.org Subject: RE:
>[Diffserv] CountActTable
>
>The Count Action is a diffserv packet handling action. Including it in
>a configuration causes counting to be done. It sure seems that this
>action ought to be configurable with the PIB, just like every other
>Diffserv packet handling action (Meter, Mark, Drop). Otherwise, one would
>have to use SNMP to CONFIGURE this element in order to later use SNMP to
>retreive the counts.
>
>This Action is not itself a counter that would go in an Accounting PIB,
>or only in an SNMP MIB.
>
>Yours, Joel M. Halpern
>
>At 03:13 PM 4/4/01 +0000, Iliff, Tina wrote:
>
> >Yacine, > >Like I said, it is just an assumption or a guess. Someone
> else will have >to answer. The Accounting PIB may be a good place for
> a >counter. However, I have not taken a look at that draft in a
> while. > >Tina Iliff >-----Original Message----- From: Yacine El
> Mghazli
> >[<<mailto:yacine.el_mghazli@ms.alcatel.fr>mailto:yacine.el_mghazli@ms.a
> lcatel.fr>mailto:yacine.el_mghazli@ms.alcate >l.fr] Sent: Wednesday,
> April 04, 2001 10:07 AM To: Iliff,
> Tina; >diffserv@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diffserv]
> CountActTable > > > I am just guessing here but it makes more sense to
> me to only have a > count > action in the MIB and not in the PIB. I do
> not consider > counting of packets > traversing certain datapath
> functional elements a > piece of policy; however, > I do consider it as
> part of a network nodes > management. > >Do you mean that counting
> packets is only managed using SNMP ? > > > Tina Iliff > > >
> -----Original Message----- > From: Yacine El > Mghazli > >
> [<<mailto:yacine.el_mghazli@alcatel.fr>mailto:yacine.el_mghazli@alcatel.fr
> >mailto:yacine.el_mghazli@alcatel.fr] > > Sent: Wednesday, April 04,
> 2001 7:39 AM > To: diffserv@ietf.org > > Subject: [Diffserv]
> CountActTable > > In the lattest DS PIB : > > > Quoted from the
> draft-ietf-diffserv-pib-03.txt (page 5) : > > Action >
> Tables > > A general extensible framework and examples of > >
> parameterization > > tables for Absolute Drop, Mark and Count >
> actions. > > and page 11 : > > 4.5.1. DSCP Mark Action PRC > > >
> (...) > > 4.5.2. Absolute Drop Action > > So why is there no Count >
> Action Table in the PIB ? > However there is an CountActTable in the >
> MIB...I feel > confused. > > Thanx > > -- Yacine El Mghazli > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >
> > Alcatel R&I > Software and Services Strategic Program - >
> VIPeR > Marcoussis, France > Tel +33 1 69 63 41 87 > Fax +33
> 1 > 69 63 11 69 > yacine.el_mghazli@ms.alcatel.fr > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >
> > > > _______________________________________________ > diffserv >
> mailing list > diffserv@ietf.org > >
> <<http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv>http://www1.ietf.org/mail
> man/listinfo/diffserv>http://www1.ietf.org/mailm >
> an/listinfo/diffserv > > Archive: > >
> <<http://www2.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/mailli
> s>http://www2.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/mailli
> s >
> t.h><http://www2.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/mai
> l>http://www2.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/mail >
> list.h > tml >
>
>_______________________________________________ diffserv mailing
>list diffserv@ietf.org
><http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv>http://www1.ietf.org/mailma
>n/listinfo/diffserv Archive:
><http://www2.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist
>.html>http://www2.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/mai
>llist.html
_______________________________________________
diffserv mailing list
diffserv@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv
Archive: http://www2.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html