⭐ 欢迎来到虫虫下载站! | 📦 资源下载 📁 资源专辑 ℹ️ 关于我们
⭐ 虫虫下载站

📄 rfc2856.txt

📁 RFC 的详细文档!
💻 TXT
📖 第 1 页 / 共 2 页
字号:

RFC 2856                High Capacity Data Types               June 2000


           not be smaller than 0.  The value of a CounterBasedGauge64
           has its maximum value whenever the information being modeled
           is greater than or equal to its maximum value, and has its
           minimum value whenever the information being modeled is
           smaller than or equal to its minimum value.  If the
           information being modeled subsequently decreases below
           (increases above) the maximum (minimum) value, the
           CounterBasedGauge64 also decreases (increases).

           Note that this TC is not strictly supported in SMIv2,
           because the 'always increasing' and 'counter wrap' semantics
           associated with the Counter64 base type are not preserved.
           It is possible that management applications which rely
           solely upon the (Counter64) ASN.1 tag to determine object
           semantics will mistakenly operate upon objects of this type
           as they would for Counter64 objects.

           This textual convention represents a limited and short-term
           solution, and may be deprecated as a long term solution is
           defined and deployed to replace it."
     SYNTAX Counter64


   ZeroBasedCounter64 ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
     STATUS current
     DESCRIPTION
           "This TC describes an object which counts events with the
           following semantics: objects of this type will be set to
           zero(0) on creation and will thereafter count appropriate
           events, wrapping back to zero(0) when the value 2^64 is
           reached.

           Provided that an application discovers the new object within
           the minimum time to wrap it can use the initial value as a
           delta since it last polled the table of which this object is
           part.  It is important for a management station to be aware
           of this minimum time and the actual time between polls, and
           to discard data if the actual time is too long or there is
           no defined minimum time.

           Typically this TC is used in tables where the INDEX space is
           constantly changing and/or the TimeFilter mechanism is in
           use.

           Note that this textual convention does not retain all the
           semantics of the Counter64 base type. Specifically, a
           Counter64 has an arbitrary initial value, but objects
           defined with this TC are required to start at the value



Bierman, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 2856                High Capacity Data Types               June 2000


           zero.  This behavior is not likely to have any adverse
           effects on management applications which are expecting
           Counter64 semantics.

           This textual convention represents a limited and short-term
           solution, and may be deprecated as a long term solution is
           defined and deployed to replace it."
     SYNTAX Counter64

   END

5.  Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
   has made any effort to identify any such rights.  Information on the
   IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
   standards- related documentation can be found in BCP-11.  Copies of
   claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
   licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
   obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
   proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can
   be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF Executive
   Director.

6.  References

   [RFC1155]   Rose, M. and K. McCloghrie, "Structure and Identification
               of Management Information for TCP/IP-based Internets",
               STD 16, RFC 1155, May 1990.

   [RFC1157]   Case, J., Fedor, M., Schoffstall, M. and J. Davin,
               "Simple Network Management Protocol", STD 15, RFC 1157,
               May 1990.

   [RFC1212]   Rose, M. and K. McCloghrie, "Concise MIB Definitions",
               STD 16, RFC 1212, March 1991.

   [RFC1215]   Rose, M., "A Convention for Defining Traps for use with
               the SNMP", RFC 1215, March 1991.



Bierman, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 7]

RFC 2856                High Capacity Data Types               June 2000


   [RFC1901]   Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser,
               "Introduction to Community-based SNMPv2", RFC 1901,
               January 1996.

   [RFC1905]   Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser,
               "Protocol Operations for Version 2 of the Simple Network
               Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1905, January 1996.

   [RFC1906]   Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser,
               "Transport Mappings for Version 2 of the Simple Network
               Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1906, January 1996.

   [RFC2021]   Waldbusser, S., "Remote Network Monitoring MIB (RMON-2)",
               RFC 2021, January 1997.

   [RFC2026]   Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision
               3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.

   [RFC2570]   Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D. and B. Stewart,
               "Introduction to Version 3 of the Internet-standard
               Network Management Framework", RFC 2570, April 1999.

   [RFC2571]   Harrington, D., Presuhn, R. and B. Wijnen, "An
               Architecture for Describing SNMP Management Frameworks",
               RFC 2571, April 1999.

   [RFC2572]   Case, J., Harrington D., Presuhn R. and B. Wijnen,
               "Message Processing and Dispatching for the Simple
               Network Management Protocol (SNMP)", RFC 2572, April
               1999.

   [RFC2573]   Levi, D., Meyer, P. and B. Stewart, "SNMPv3
               Applications", RFC 2573, April 1999.

   [RFC2574]   Blumenthal, U. and B. Wijnen, "User-based Security Model
               (USM) for version 3 of the Simple Network Management
               Protocol (SNMPv3)", RFC 2574, April 1999.

   [RFC2575]   Wijnen, B., Presuhn, R. and K. McCloghrie, "View-based
               Access Control Model (VACM) for the Simple Network
               Management Protocol (SNMP)", RFC 2575, April 1999.

   [RFC2578]   McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J.,
               Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Structure of Management
               Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April
               1999.





Bierman, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 8]

RFC 2856                High Capacity Data Types               June 2000


   [RFC2579]   McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J.,
               Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Textual Conventions for
               SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999.

   [RFC2580]   McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J.,
               Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Conformance Statements for
               SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, April 1999.

7.  Security Considerations

   This module does not define any management objects. Instead, it
   defines a set of textual conventions which may be used by other MIB
   modules to define management objects.

   Meaningful security considerations can only be written in the modules
   that define management objects.

8.  Authors' Addresses

   Andy Bierman
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   170 West Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA 95134 USA

   Phone: +1 408-527-3711
   EMail: abierman@cisco.com


   Keith McCloghrie
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   170 West Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA 95134 USA

   Phone: +1 408-526-5260
   EMail: kzm@cisco.com


   Randy Presuhn
   BMC Software, Inc.
   Office 1-3141
   2141 North First Street
   San Jose,  California 95131 USA

   Phone: +1 408 546-1006
   EMail: rpresuhn@bmc.com






Bierman, et al.             Standards Track                     [Page 9]

RFC 2856                High Capacity Data Types               June 2000


9.  Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000).  All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.



















Bierman, et al.             Standards Track                    [Page 10]


⌨️ 快捷键说明

复制代码 Ctrl + C
搜索代码 Ctrl + F
全屏模式 F11
切换主题 Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键 ?
增大字号 Ctrl + =
减小字号 Ctrl + -