Re: configuration: writable MIB modules versus NETCONF/YANG modules

Hi,

I agree the biases and claims kind of get in the way of providing good
advice.

It would be good if we had some empirical research to back up our advice.
Has anybody done an analysis of the timing/overhead of repetitive small
queries between Netconf/MIB and SNMP/MIB?
I'd love to see an analysis; unfortunately I don't have the environment to
run such a test.
Can anybody provide such tests?

I would like to see comparisons of 
1) a query for five counters in different tables, plus sysUptime,
2) a query for an initial read of a table with multiple rows of mixed types,
3) a query for an initial read of multiple inter-related tables,
4) a non-initial read of a table focusing on the objects that are likely to
change dynamically in less than a (typical) day.

Does anybody have  other monitoring scenarios that should be tested?

David Harrington
[email protected]
+1-603-828-1401

> -----Original Message-----
> From: OPS-AREA [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Wes
> Hardaker
> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 11:11 PM
> To: Andy Bierman
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [OPS-AREA] configuration: writable MIB modules versus
> NETCONF/YANG modules
> 
> Andy Bierman <[email protected]> writes:
> 
> > I agree, but I think NETCONF monitoring got left out of Juergen's
> > summary.
> 
> Yes, it's a start.  Not a complete list.
> 
> The point is that there are pluses and minuses to each one.  But those
> are not spelled out anywhere (especially because each person biased
> toward the pluses of their own favorite and the minuses of everyone
> else's).
> --
> Wes Hardaker
> Parsons
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OPS-AREA mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-area