Re: [Isms] Why SNMPv3? [WG Review: Integrated Security Model for SNMP (isms)]

On Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:08:34 +0200 Juergen wrote:
JS> This goes back to a rather old discussion whether there are environments
JS> where SNMP writes are used, how big these environments might be (I leave
JS> it to you do define the metric) and whether the IETF should worry about 
JS> these environments. There are two camps, one arguing that SNMP writes 
JS> are just an illusion since nobody actually uses them.  The other camp 
JS> claims that SNMP writes are a reality (or believes they will become a 
JS> reality once all the security issues have been solved).

SNMP writes are a reality. I personally have developed at least 3 SNMP agents
with write support that interface with existing proprietary control mechanisms.

JS> To this end, there was never a real investigation to sort this out. It
JS> would be more than interesting to collect packet traces from real-world 
JS> networks (and not just ISP IP networks since SNMP seems to be used quite 
JS> a bit in telco networks, cable networks, enterprise networks largely 
JS> based on IEEE 802 LANs, ATM networks, ...)

All of the agents were for clients in the cable industry who were adding SNMP
support under pressure from their customers.

All used SNMP v1/v2c, relaying on a non-public network for access control.


-- 
Robert Story; NET-SNMP Junkie
<irc://irc.freenode.net/#net-snmp>   <http://www.net-snmp.org/>

You are lost in a twisty maze of little standards, all different.