SNMP MIBs and IETF standards track work

"Natale, Bob" <[email protected]> Tue, 7 Nov 2006 13:32:51 -0500
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.ops-nm
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hi Dan,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:[email protected]]=20
> Sent: Monday, November 06, 2006 9:18 PM
> ...
> I believe that there is no real problem here, as the number of MIB
> documents that I saw advancing on the standards-track lately is as
low
> as zero.=20

Hmmm.  Perhaps I am mis-interpreting your statement above, but a quick
scan of the I-D database for anything with "mib" in the title returns
71 active entries.  A fair number of those appear to be intended for
the standards track.  A large percentage of the remainder, IMHO,
probably should be.  A number of these MIBs seem to address
current/important/exciting capabilities.

Perhaps we in the O&M Area have not been as enthusiastic and energetic
about promoting standard MIBs in the recent past as we were at one
time...?

[FWIW: It has been my view for a long time -- clearly unsupported by
community consensus -- that "richer" MIBs are the missing ingredient to
continuing and expanding the success of SNMP.  Richer MIBs would
leverage the cumulative effects of Moore's Law, control plane
evolution, and community experience via more capable SNMP agents that
would focus on "higher-order" management constructs (such as templates,
profiles, policies, services, operations, and so forth) exposed via
those MIBs.]

I recognize (and contribute to, in non-IETF venues) the multi-protocol
world we live and work in today...it is a promising but clearly
unsettled environment.  In the meantime (and as Randy suggested),
critical networks need solid interoperable management.  That SNMP is
still a contender for that role is more a testament to its early
strengths and vast deployment than to any recent shepherding on our
part.

True, both of those pluses are fast diminishing in the marketplace.
Whether we should just let that happen without a viable successor in
place is, IMHO, an important matter for the community to decide.
Perhaps we have already decided (in the affirmative) by default...?

Cheers,
BobN

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