RE: I-D ACTION:draft-hardaker-snmp-session-sm-00.txt

Hi

I've only skimmed the draft, but I suspect a MIB to do cleanup may not be
the best approach. If things are setup using non-SNMP means, shouldn't tear
down be done that way?

If I understood things from my quick skim, I think I like the approach of
not using SNMP to set up the session since it avoids all the bootstrap
issues and is easier to sell to people who don't think they want to use SNMP
for configuration.

Sharon

-----Original Message-----
From: Wes Hardaker [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2003 1:30 PM
To: Golovinsky, Eugene
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-hardaker-snmp-session-sm-00.txt


>>>>> On Thu, 9 Oct 2003 10:15:40 -0500 , "Golovinsky, Eugene" 
>>>>> <[email protected]> said:

Eugene> For your TODO list. I think we also need to have a section that 
Eugene> allows management of sessions.

Yep.  It's actually planned for the MIB, and David Perkins has promised to
write a MIB to do a good number of the tasks you've talked about.

Eugene> Simply relaying on aging of the session or the key may not be 
Eugene> enough.

Agreed.

Thanks for the comments!  (and the feedback to let us know that you think a
management element is needed as well)
-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta