[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Methods in the NIM requirements

> The only way that standard MIBs could get close to 100% coverage would
> be for all vendors' products to be exactly the same.  Except 
> for "clone"
> markets, it is the nature of business that vendors try to 
> differentiate
> their products by making them different.  The purpose of standard
> protocols is to make different products interoperate, not to make all
> products the same.  So, while not having 100% coverage does 
> make it harder
> to write management applications, it's always going to be like that,
> and the desires of network/policy management is not going to 
> change it.

I would agree with your conclusion. However, I also feel we can do a better
job at being more inclusive of variations of implementations in the
standards. Just because we have chosen to model the least common denominator
does not mean that we have to continue to do so, particularly if we have a
richer modeling language that supports divergence more easily.