Re: Methods in the NIM requirements

[Jon Saperia <saperia@mediaone.net>]

on 05/02/2000 3:15 PM, Andrea Westerinen at andreawest@mindspring.com wrote:

> Let me try to reset the thinking on CIM and DEN.  If you look at CIM as
> organizing, supplementing and pulling all the management info together,
> similar to what the backing OO databases do for the enterprise console
> vendors - then, you get a whole different view rather than saying that CIM
> and DEN are recreating/redefining the world.
> 
> Andrea

Thanks for this. Your explanation is very helpful to me. Unfortunately it
puts a face on a couple of concerns I have had for some time.

1.  The key to good database performance in the context you give is that it
is well tuned to the use model and data that the management systems work
with. They are hand tuned. It may well be that the translation to these
models might be very expensive (always has been).

2. The point of all of this is to foster better interoperability right - the
problem that will occur here is the same one that has existed for some time.
Some vendors will always do their own thing and not play by the rules making
special cases code a requirement for each vendor, that means third party
developers are out of the loop since finances make it unprofitable for them
to write generic code. Back to the single vendor proprietary approach under
a thin veil of standards.

Sorry for the pessimistic view.

/jon