📄 rfc1187.txt
字号:
RFC 1187 Bulk Table Retrieval with the SNMP October 1990 as 1.5 times the largest observed round-trip time. If the timeout- adjustment is greater than the current timeout, the current timeout is set to the timeout-adjustment. Otherwise, the current timeout is averaged with the timeout-adjustment. Finally, if at least one thread did not receive a response, then the thread is identified which has waited the longest. If the elapsed time (with noise factor) since the last request (or retransmission) is greater than the current timeout value, another retransmission is attempted. wait for events () { backoff ::= TRUE, maxrtt ::= 0; find the thread which has been waiting the longest for a response; timedelta = timeout - time since request was sent for thread; wait up to timedelta seconds or until some messages arrive; if (least one message arrived) { discard any messages which aren't responses; foreach (response which corresponds to a thread) { if (the response is a duplicate) drop it and continue; if (this response is for a message that was not retransmitted) { if (the round-trip time is larger than maxrtt) set maxrtt to the new round-trip time; if (round-trip time / number of active threads < minimum previous round-trip time / number of active threads) { set new minimum round-trip time per number of active threads set new maximum number of threads } backoff ::= FALSE; } } } if (backoff) double timeout; elsif (maxrtt > 0) { timeadjust ::= maxrtt * 3 / 2; if (timeadjust > timeout) timeout ::= timeadjust; backoff ::= TRUE; elseRose, McCloghrie & Davin [Page 7]RFC 1187 Bulk Table Retrieval with the SNMP October 1990 timeout ::= (timeout + timeadjust) / 2; } if (timeout exceeds some threshold) set timeout to that threshold; elsif (timeout is smaller than some threshold) set timeout to that threshold; if (at least one thread didn't receive a response) { find the thread which has been waiting the longest for a response, and determine the elapsed time since a message was sent; if (the elapsed time with noise is greater than timeout) { if (the number of retransmissions for this thread exceeds a threshold) abort the algorithm; retransmit the request; backoff ::= TRUE; } } }4.6. Finding the Median between two OIDs The object identifier space is neither uniform nor continuous. As such, it is not always possible to choose an object identifier which is lexicographically-between two arbitrary object identifiers. In view of this, the pipelined algorithm makes a best-effort attempt. Starting from the beginning, each sub-identifier of the two OIDs is scanned until a difference is encountered. At this point there are several possible conditions: (1) The upper OID has run out of sub-identifiers. In this case, either the two OIDs are are identical or the lower OID is greater than the upper OID (an interface error), so no OID is returned. (2) The lower OID has run out of sub-identifiers. In this case, the first subsequent non-zero sub-identifier from the upper OID is located. If no such sub-identifier is found, then no OID exists between the lower and upper OIDs, and no OID is returned. Otherwise, a copy of the upper OID is made, but truncated at this non-zero sub-identifier, which is subsequently halved, and the resulting OID is returned. (3) Otherwise, a copy of the lower OID is made, but truncatedRose, McCloghrie & Davin [Page 8]RFC 1187 Bulk Table Retrieval with the SNMP October 1990 at the point of difference. This last sub-identifier is then set to the arithmetic mean of the difference. In the case where the difference is only 1 (so the last sub-identifier remains the same) then a new sub- identifier is added, taking care to be larger than a possible sub-identifier present in the lower OID. Regardless, the resulting OID is returned. oid_median (lower, upper) OID lower, upper; { for (i ::= 1; i < upper:nelem; i++) { if (i > lower:nelem) { while (upper:elems[i] == 0) if (++i > upper:nelem) return NULL; median ::= copy of upper; median:nelem ::= i; median:elems[i] ::= upper:elems[i] / 2; return median; } if (lower:elems[i] == upper:elems[i]) continue; median ::= copy of lower; median:nelem ::= i; median:elems[i] ::= (lower:elems[i]+upper:elems[i])/2; if (median:elems[i] == lower:elems[i]) { median:nelem ::= (i + 1); if (lower:nelem < i) median:elems[median:nelem] ::= 127; elsif ((x ::= lower:elems[i + 1]) >= 16383) median:elems[median:nelem] ::= x + 16383; elsif (x >= 4095) median:elems[median:nelem] ::= x + 4095; elsif (x >= 1023) median:elems[median:nelem] ::= x + 1023; elsif (x >= 255) median:elems[median:nelem] ::= x + 255; else median:elems[median:nelem] ::= (x / 2) + 128; } return median; }Rose, McCloghrie & Davin [Page 9]RFC 1187 Bulk Table Retrieval with the SNMP October 1990 return NULL; }4.7. Experience with the Pipelined Algorithm This pipelined algorithm has been implemented and some experimentation has been performed. It would be premature to provide extensive performance figures at this time, as the pipelined algorithm is still being tuned, and is implemented only in a prototype setting. However, on tables of size O(2500), performance of 121 entries/second has been observed. In contrast, the serial algorithm has performance of roughly 56 entries/second for the same table.4.8. Dynamic Range of Timeout Values It should be noted that the pipelined algorithm takes a simplistic approach with the timeout value: it does not maintain a history of the value and act accordingly. For example, if the timeout reaches the maximum timeout limit, and then latches for some period of time, this indicates a resource (either the network or the agent) is saturated. Unfortunately, a solution is difficult: an elegant approach would be to combine two threads (but it is quite possible that no two consecutive threads exist when this determination is made). Another approach might be to delay the transmission for threads which are ready to issue a new get-next operation. Similarly, if the timeout drops to the minimum value and subsequently latches, more threads should be started.4.9. Incorrect Agent Implementations An interesting result is that many agents do not properly implement the powerful get-next operator. In particular, when a get-next request contains an operand with an arbitrarily-generated suffix, some agent implementations will handle this improperly, and ultimately return a result which is lexicographically less than the operand! A typical cause of this is when the instance-identifier for a columnar object is formed by a MAC or IP address, so each octet of the address forms a sub-identifier of the instance-identifier. In such circumstances, the incorrect agent implementations compare against only the least significant octet of the sub-identifiers in the operand, instead of the full value of the sub-identifiers.Rose, McCloghrie & Davin [Page 10]RFC 1187 Bulk Table Retrieval with the SNMP October 1990 Upon encountering such an interaction, the pipelined algorithm implementation declares the thread dead (noting a possible gap in the table), and continues.5. The Parallel Algorithm One interesting optimization is to view the problem in two steps: in the first step, one column of the table is traversed to determine the full range of instances identifiers meaningful in the table. (Indeed, although as described above, the pipelined algorithm retrieves a single column, the prototype implementation can retrieve multiple columns). In the second step, additional columns can be retrieved using the SNMP get operation, since the instance identifiers are already known. Further, the manager can dynamically determine how many variables can be placed in a single SNMP get operation in order to minimize the number of requests. Of course, since the agent's execution of the get operation is often less expensive than execution of the powerful get-next operation, when multiple columns are request, this two-step process requires less execution time on the agent. A second algorithm can be developed, the "parallel algorithm". At present, each thread is mapped onto a single SNMP operation. A powerful insight is to suggest mapping several threads onto a single SNMP operation: the manager must dynamically determine how many variables can be placed in a single powerful get-next operation. This has the advantage of reducing traffic, at the expense of requiring the agent to utilize more resources for each request. Earlier it was noted that the serial retrieval of objects could be viewed as a degenerate case of the pipelined algorithm, in which the number of active threads was one. Similarly, the pipelined algorithm is a special case of the parallel algorithm, in which the number of threads per SNMP operation is one.5.1. Experience with the Parallel Algorithm The parallel algorithm has been implemented and some experimentation has been performed. It would be premature to provide extensive performance figures at this time, as the algorithm is still being tuned, and is implemented only in a prototype setting. However, on tables of size O(2500), performance of 320 entries/second has been observed, a performance improvement of 571% over the serial algorithm.6. Acknowledgements A lot of the ideas on pipelining are motivated by Van Jacobson's workRose, McCloghrie & Davin [Page 11]RFC 1187 Bulk Table Retrieval with the SNMP October 1990 on adaptive timers in TCP. The parallelization modifications were originally suggested by Jeffrey D. Case. Finally, the comments of the following individual is acknowledged: Frank Kastenholz, Racal-Interlan7. References [1] Case, J., Fedor, M., Schoffstall, M., and J. Davin, Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP), RFC 1157, SNMP Research, Performance Systems International, Performance Systems International, MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, May 1990.Security Considerations Security issues are not discussed in this memo.Authors' Addresses Marshall T. Rose PSI, Inc. PSI California Office P.O. Box 391776 Mountain View, CA 94039 Phone: (415) 961-3380 EMail: mrose@PSI.COM Keith McCloghrie Hughes LAN Systems 1225 Charleston Road Mountain View, CA 94043 Phone: (415) 966-7934 EMail: KZM@HLS.COM James R. Davin MIT Laboratory for Computer Science, NE43-507 545 Technology Square Cambridge, MA 02139 Phone: (617) 253-6020 EMail: jrd@ptt.lcs.mit.eduRose, McCloghrie & Davin [Page 12]
⌨️ 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 + -