Re: Management Requirements

On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 09:51:44PM +0000, Dave Thaler wrote:
> 
> The data instances can have a larger volume and may need to travel over
> shaky links.   Also there's an existing MIB that is outdated and we want
> to obsolete.   So the WG is currently using SNMP for retrieving 
> operational state and debugging, by doing an update that is intended
> to obsolete the existing MIB RFC.

Out of curiosity, is there meanwhile a clear description you can point
to explaining why the old NAT-MIB is broken?
  
> > Perhaps these thoughts help to make a suitable decision. One could of
> > course also ask what the contributors prefer to implement, e.g. what they
> > expect to ease integration into management systems relevant for the
> > protocol domain.
> 
> Answered above.   Looking to OPS for clear guidance on what eventing
> protocol to use (or what criteria we should use to decide).   I don't want
> multiple ones.

What are the events considered? How frequent will they occur? How
stringent are the requirements to deliver them (almost) all or is the
even source designed to throttle notifications? How much data is
needed to describe the events? If all that is rather "standard" (in
terms of notification volume and individual notification size), then
SNMP might just do fine.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>