Cisco Cisco Prime Optical 9.5 Technical References
TM FORUM Implementation Statement (IS) Template and Guidelines
some cases, an additional parameter (i.e., the probable cause qualifier) is needed to uniquely identify an
alarm. Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-6 is a template that should be used to indicate
vendor support for (or service provider need of) probable causes. The table effectively implies all the supported
alarms of a vendor, or the required alarms of a service provider.
alarm. Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-6 is a template that should be used to indicate
vendor support for (or service provider need of) probable causes. The table effectively implies all the supported
alarms of a vendor, or the required alarms of a service provider.
Not allow of the entries in a row need to be filled. The intent is to provide sufficient information to ensure
interoperability over the MTNM interface. It is also possible to cover some attributes (e.g.,
probableCauseQualifier) by providing a general statement before the template, describing how the attribute is
used. An example usage of this table is provided in Section 4.5.
interoperability over the MTNM interface. It is also possible to cover some attributes (e.g.,
probableCauseQualifier) by providing a general statement before the template, describing how the attribute is
used. An example usage of this table is provided in Section 4.5.
The service provider or vendor preparing an implementation statement should place their Probable Cause
Template table in this section.
Template table in this section.
Table Error! No text of specified style in document.-6 Probable Cause Template
Probable
Cause
Cause
Native
Probable
Cause
(Optional)
Associ-
ated
Object
Type
Layer
Rates
Rates
Probable
Cause
Qualifiers
(optional)
(optional)
Perceived
Severity
Service
Affecting
Additional
Informa-
tion
(optional)
Comments
Probable
Cause #1,
e.g., LOS
Cause #1,
e.g., LOS
This
attribute
represents
the
equipment
vendor’s
probable
cause –
this may
be mapped
to an
MTNM
probable
cause.
attribute
represents
the
equipment
vendor’s
probable
cause –
this may
be mapped
to an
MTNM
probable
cause.
Indicate
the object
types that
can be
associated
with this
probable
cause
the object
types that
can be
associated
with this
probable
cause
Indicate
the layer
rates at
which this
probable
cause
applies
the layer
rates at
which this
probable
cause
applies
Indicate
the
probable
cause
qualifiers
that can be
associated
with the
probable
cause
the
probable
cause
qualifiers
that can be
associated
with the
probable
cause
Indicate
perceived
severity
associated
with this
probable
cause –
this may
depend on
the
associated
object
and/or
layer rate
perceived
severity
associated
with this
probable
cause –
this may
depend on
the
associated
object
and/or
layer rate
Indicate
whether or
not this
probable
cause is
expected
to be
service
affecting –
this may
depend on
the
associated
object
and/or
layer rate
whether or
not this
probable
cause is
expected
to be
service
affecting –
this may
depend on
the
associated
object
and/or
layer rate
Any
additional
information
and the
associated
meaning
should be
noted if it
needs to
be
interpreted
by the
NMS. The
additional
information
should be
listed in the
form Name
– Value.
additional
information
and the
associated
meaning
should be
noted if it
needs to
be
interpreted
by the
NMS. The
additional
information
should be
listed in the
form Name
– Value.
This column
can be used
to provide
additional
details about
the probable
cause, e.g.,
one could
describe the
conditions
under which
an alarm is
generated
by the EMS.
can be used
to provide
additional
details about
the probable
cause, e.g.,
one could
describe the
conditions
under which
an alarm is
generated
by the EMS.
Probable
Cause #2
Cause #2
…
2.1.6.1.1 Usage of the Probable Cause Qualifier
The probableCauseQualifier parameter is useful for two reasons:
It allows the set of values for the probableCause parameter to remain generic. In systems where only one
probable cause field is managed, there is a never-ending succession of updates to the set of probable causes.
Every time a new equipment type is introduced, new values need to be added. The practical result is that the
model is never stabilized.
probable cause field is managed, there is a never-ending succession of updates to the set of probable causes.
Every time a new equipment type is introduced, new values need to be added. The practical result is that the
model is never stabilized.
It allows several alarms to be sent from the same object, with the same probable cause, while still remaining
identifiably different. (The alternative would be to manage unique values of the notification identifier, but some
EMS vendors have problems with that.)
identifiably different. (The alternative would be to manage unique values of the notification identifier, but some
EMS vendors have problems with that.)
Page 20 of 115
TeleManagement Forum 2007
TMF814Av3.1