[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Separation of protocol and information model
>>>>> Chen, Weijing writes:
Chen> What is exact the problem with SNMP? If it is the problem of
Chen> RowStatus and StorageType, then why throw out the other good
Chen> part of SNMP like separation of protocol operation and data
Chen> model? Like old proverb said, don't throw baby out with dirty
Chen> water.
SNMP problems are well documented. Read the latest issues of the
Simple Times or read the failed EOS and SMIng WG mail archives as well
as the SNMPv3 archives to understand what is broken and to get a
feeling why the SNMP community is too deadlocked to fix this stuff
in order to make it work for configuration.
Regarding netconf: I think netconf right now is designed to keep the
separation of data models and protocol operations. The running,
target, startup, ... configurations basically map to what would have
been contexts in the SNMP world and the SNMP protocol very well
distinguishes contexts - so it is part of the protocol. (At least
SNMPv3 I must add in all fairness. ;-)
The other extreme option would be to have no generic protocol
operations and leave it to the devices to provide whatever set of
RPC primitives the vendor considers useful. (This is where IMHO
web services and WSDL would shine since they fit very well for this
purpose.) Whether this is good or bad surely depends on your
environment. But listening to the operators that spoke up, they
really want to have a protocol to distribute, update, check and
activate configurations across collections of devices. And I think
this is what netconf so far tries to achieve.
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/> P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany
--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>