Re: RE: SNMPv3 as MIDCOM protocol: Opinions?

At 12/5/2002:01:39 PM, Melinda Shore wrote:

Hi Melinda,

>> I was hesitating to make a similar statement, fearing of being disruptive,
>> but I do share the very exact same feeling.
>
>The decision to revise the documents needs to be based on
>the identification of *specific* problems with them rather
>than a general sense that something is not quite right.

Yeah, in general I agree with your position...but I've got
a very general doubt about the specific problem (as I see
it) of IETF protocol-efforts like AAA (which I followed
for a while) and Midcom (which I have not followed much
since its very early days) ending up by asking the question
"Now, what protocol should be this protocol?" and especially
when one of the (evidently) conceivable answers to that
question is thought to be "SNMP".

SNMP[v3] is the Internet standard management protocol (or
words to that effect).  Other IETF protocols should be
designed with manageability by SNMPv3 in mind, including
current era carrier-grade MIB support.

That is, if SNMPv3 is to be *the* protocol for protocol X,
then what is the added value of protocol X?

If protocol X is not SNMPv3 (which is always true except
for one value of X) but cannot be managed by SNMPv3, then
the IETF process is flawed in some way (and needs to be
fixed).

So, maybe all I am saying here is that I am really clueless.
If so, I will look forward to being clued in.

Thanks,

BobN