Re: configuration: writable MIB modules versus NETCONF/YANGmodules

Hi Tom,

The important questions are:
- will the writable aspects of the MIB module be implemented by the 
vendors (basically requested by the operators)?
- will the writable aspects be used by the NMS'?

Regards, Benoit
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Benoit Claise" <[email protected]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2014 12:39 AM
>> Dear all,
>>
>> We occasionally see read-write MIB module proposals within the IETF.
>> However, the write capabilities of those MIB modules are rarely
> implemented.
>> While discussing this issue with the MIB doctors, we arrive to the
>> conclusion that it's now time to set the direction for future MIB
>> developments within the IETF. Basically, let's not specify read-write
>> MIB modules unless we have a good reason. Read-only MIB modules are
>> still fine though, as SNMP is clearly used for monitoring purposes.
>>
>> Here is the statement we came up with:
>>
>>      The OPS area recommends the use of NETCONF/YANG standards for
>>      configuration. IETF working groups are therefore encouraged to use
>>      the NETCONF/YANG standards for configuration, specifically in new
>>      charters. SNMP MIB modules modifying persistent configuration
> state
>>      should only be produced by working groups in cases of clear
> utility
>>      and consensus to use SNMP write operations for configuration.
>>
>> Ideally, this should become an IESG statement.
>> Your feedback is most welcome.
> You probably know that there is currently a consensus call in progress
> over
>
> "Please indicate Support or Oppose for this MIB
> (draft-ietf-mpls-tp-te-mib) to be read-only."
>
> and I was pleasantly surprised to see opposition, albeit with one
> opponent later changing their mind (perhaps they were sat on from a
> height:-).  I don't see much sign of Netxxxx in the mpls arena but there
> is a need there for configuration, since there need not be a control
> plane to set things up.  Perhaps writable MIB modules will still be with
> us in the distant future in some corners of the Internet..
>
> Ideally, this idea would be fleshed out in an I-D.
>
> Tom Petch
>
>> Regards, the MIB doctors & Benoit
> .
>