[c-nsp] OID to pick up Device Type of Cisco devices

[lee.e.rian at census.gov]

Lincoln Dale wrote on 11/01/2008 06:46:35 PM:

> Karl Gaissmaier wrote:
> >> Maybe RFC1213 ipForwarding would work
> >>
> >>           ipForwarding OBJECT-TYPE
> >>               SYNTAX  INTEGER {
> >>                           forwarding(1),    -- acting as a gateway
> >>                           not-forwarding(2) -- NOT acting as a 
gateway
> >>                       }
> >>
> >> but I kind of doubt it.  We just got some SUP32s in to replace CatOS 
> >> SUP2s
> >> (pure L2 switches) & I haven't been able to figure out yet how to 
> >> tell them

> ipForwarding should work fine.  it _should_ change behavior based on 
> whether there are any L3 interfaces configured or not.

I hope not.  Seems to me that it _should_ change behavior based on whether 
or not the device is acting as a router.  Consider the case of all 
interfaces configured as a switchport.  Plain old L2 switch - right?  Now 
add an IP address under the vlan interface so that I can manage the 
switch.  It still shouldn't be playing router - so ipForwarding should 
still return not-forwarding(2)

> the challenge is how to use this moving forward on Cisco platforms that 
> have dedicated out-of-band management interfaces (e.g. Nexus platforms), 

> because technically speaking, they ALWAYS have at L3 interface 
> configured (mgmt0 out-of-band) which is L3 by definition because it 
> exists in its own 'management' VRF).

I'm missing why having an L3 interface would make any difference.  A 
cat2900xl configured with an L3 address for management purposes doesn't 
turn the box into a router.  Why should simply configuring an L3 interface 
on a box change the value of ipForwarding?

hrmm..  or are you saying that some boxes are *always* going to think 
they're a router regardless?

Regards,
Lee