Re: RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] Mandatory Requirement for configurationby SNMP

Hi -

> From: "David B Harrington" <[email protected]>
> To: "'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'" <[email protected]>; "'MIB Doctors'" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
> Cc: "'Mark Townsley'" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 10:34 AM
> Subject: [OPS-NM] RE: [MIB-DOCTORS] Mandatory Requirement for configurationby SNMP 
...
> Since possible alternatives are on the horizon, and the IETF
> management framework has always permitted the support for alternative
> protocols for carrying MIB module data, I suggest that any long-lived
> requirements section RECOMMEND, but not REQUIRE, SNMP so that
> alternative protocols could be used in the future to meet these
> management functionality requirements.
> 
> However, I believe that MIB modules and support for SNMP should
> continue to be required as a condition of IETF standards-track
> advancement until suitable alternative solutions are completed and
> available.
...

I'm having trouble fitting these two paragraphs together.
The first is consistent with the changes suggested, but
the second is a strong argument against making those
changes.

Randy


_______________________________________________
OPS-NM mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-nm