Re: is there any group interest in my MIB proposal?
"B. Levin" <[email protected]> Thu, 27 Feb 2003 08:41:53 -0800 (PST)
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.eos |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--- Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>> B Levin writes: > > Bryan> if there's still group interest in my MIB > proposal, I am > Bryan> willing to create and release a sample > implementation (based on > Bryan> the net-snmp code base). > > Personally, I generally prefer to fix problems where > they occur rather than patching things around them. > > But this is just one data point and I think at least > for comparison purposes, it would be very good to > have your alternate approach available so that > people actually can make measurements and provide > hard facts rather than speculations. I'm not sure why you think its 'patching around things' to support a hybrid solution. its been done by many vendors with great success to-date. I admit the hybrid snmp-based snapshot & file-transfer approach is not a purist solution; but sometimes getting the job done quickly, efficiently and with minimal disruption to existing systems can justify non-traditional approaches. scp/ftp (etc) is already working and deployed. snmpv2/v3 is already working and deployed. its not a major effort to extend a subagent by adding another MIB module at the agent level, and even less effort to add one at the NMS side. how long do we want to wait for a purist solution to be demonstrated, implemented and shipped? if we care about actually getting bulk data shipped across wires efficiently AND we want this solution to be adopted by vendors in our lifetimes, can't we accept a slightly non-traditional approach TODAY while letting the R&D effort of the more elegant solution continue in parallel? do we care about the disruption that occurs when EVERYONE must upgrade their NMS to be able to use these agent new operations? as a network operator, I would certainly not relish having to upgrade all my existing tools simply to solve the problem of efficient data transfer of management information. after the benefits of this new protocol version are demonstrated, perhaps it will be a convincing case to go thru the expense of a whole retooling effort. but that's certainly NOT a short-term thing, speaking from an operations perspective. in the meantime, a less intrusive upgrade via MIB modules sure seems to meet our needs of solving the problem at hand, today. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/