Duplicate MIB Objects - what is the impact? - SNMP

This is a discussion on Duplicate MIB Objects - what is the impact? - SNMP ; Hello! I am trying to create a set of proprietary MIBs that will be common to all of our products. However, I have run into some cases where the object definitions and TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONS need to be product specific. So I ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Duplicate MIB Objects - what is the impact?

  1. Duplicate MIB Objects - what is the impact?

    Hello!

    I am trying to create a set of proprietary MIBs that will be common to
    all of our products. However, I have run into some cases where the
    object definitions and TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONS need to be product
    specific. So I was hoping to separate the MIBs into common and product
    MIBs. Each product MIB would have the same objects but with slightly
    different definitions or TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONS tailored to the specific
    product. Now if a SNMP Manager wanted to support our family of
    products and tried to compile all of the MIBs, would there be a
    problem? Is there any common way of handling this situation?

    Thanks

    Kai Mao

  2. Re: Duplicate MIB Objects - what is the impact?


    If these definitions between different product are intended to have the
    same descriptors and/or object identifiers, it will cause problems for
    most applications. Defining multiple objects with the same OID is
    illegal (unless one is meant to obsolete the other and doesn't make any
    incompatible changes). Descriptors can be the same between different
    modules, though lots of tools aren't smart enough to deal. The IETF
    doesn't allow duplicate descriptors in IETF-standard modules (though they
    have slipped through on occasion -- c.f. snmpCommunityGroup).

    Now, if what you want to do is actually to have different products
    implement different subsets of the same objects (same descriptor, same
    OID, same types, etc.), then usually the way to handle it is with one or
    more MODULE-COMPLIANCE statements describing the minimum subset that
    every product has in common, or one for each of different device classes
    etc. It would also be good to define an AGENT-CAPABILITIES statement for
    each product, though not everyone supports those either.

    In article <64f1d108.0307231222.25d0c20b@posting.google.com>,
    kai.mao@fnc.fujitsu.com says...
    > Hello!
    >
    > I am trying to create a set of proprietary MIBs that will be common to
    > all of our products. However, I have run into some cases where the
    > object definitions and TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONS need to be product
    > specific. So I was hoping to separate the MIBs into common and product
    > MIBs. Each product MIB would have the same objects but with slightly
    > different definitions or TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONS tailored to the specific
    > product. Now if a SNMP Manager wanted to support our family of
    > products and tried to compile all of the MIBs, would there be a
    > problem? Is there any common way of handling this situation?
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    > Kai Mao
    >


    --
    Michael Kirkham
    Muonics
    http://www.muonics.com/

+ Reply to Thread