SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


    [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    Re: SNMP traps



    Mark,
    
    I'm new to the iSCSI MIB effort, but I'll toss out some suggestions...
    
    I think we should trap iSCSI Session terminations, except those
    accomplished via Logout.  I know this might result in traps for "normal"
    events, like when someone powers off their initiator instead of shutting
    down gracefully.  If we want to get fancy, we could send them
    conditionally, e.g., only trap if there were any incomplete commands or
    undelivered responses at the time the session terminated.
    
    Trapping iSCSI connection terminations would be interesting too, especially
    to implementations which allow multiple connections per session.  Loss of a
    connection could mean loss of capacity or reduced reliability of a session,
    which could be reflected on the management station display.  This may
    already be covered by the TCP MIB (I haven't checked yet), but coordinating
    a TCP trap with iSCSI objects would be more difficult than having an iSCSI
    trap.
    
    It would also be helpful to trap changes to a target's LU list, and/or LUN
    mappings.  Minimally, a simple trap to notify the manager that a change
    occurred would be enough to prompt the management station to do the GETs to
    refresh its tables.
    
    Tom McSweeney
    iSCSI Development, IBM Storage Networking
    Email: rf42tpme@us.ibm.com
    Phone: (USA) 919-254-5634  (tie line: 444-5634)
    Fax:   (USA) 919-254-0391  (tie line: 444-0391)
    
    
    Mark Bakke <mbakke@cisco.com>@ece.cmu.edu on 03/28/2001 09:57:47 AM
    
    Sent by:  owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
    
    
    To:   Sandeep Joshi <sandeepj@research.bell-labs.com>
    cc:   ips@ece.cmu.edu
    Subject:  Re: SNMP traps
    
    
    
    Sandeep-
    
    We have been looking for requirements for traps, and have not
    addressed them yet.  You are the first to really ask for them.
    
    Trapping the login and authentication failures seems like a
    good idea; do you have any other ideas or requirements?
    
    Thanks,
    
    Mark
    
    


Home

Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:05:14 2001
6315 messages in chronological order