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

Re: Recommendation on the path forward for EOS

To: D.T.Shield@csc.liv.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Recommendation on the path forward for EOS
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2002 17:44:39 +0200
Cc: eos@ops.ietf.org
In-reply-to: <200209251431.g8PEVCd14064@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk> (messagefrom Dave Shield on Wed, 25 Sep 2002 15:31:12 +0100)
References: <200209251431.g8PEVCd14064@daves.staff.csc.liv.ac.uk>

>>>>> Dave Shield writes:

Dave> One question:

Dave> Is it intended that this would be a new PDU within the existing
Dave> SNMPv3/v3MP framework, or would we be expecting to define a new
Dave> version at some level (either SNMPv4 or SNMPv3/v4MP) ?

I have not seen anybody who seriously proposed to invent a new message
processing model. But I guess your question is which mechanism or bit
we use to signal that one is sending new PDUs. This is certainly a
question to think about. And even if the answer would be to toggle a
bit in the SNMP version field, I still would not call that another
message processing model. But I am not convinced we need to bump the
version field at all.

[BTW, several years ago I lost a battle to convince the SNMPv3 WG that
 we should have a report mechanism for unknown PDUs so that apps can
 simply try new ones without having to wait for a timeout...]

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder    <http://www.informatik.uni-osnabrueck.de/schoenw/>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Recommendation on the path forward for EOS
  - From: "David T. Perkins" <dperkins@dsperkins.com>

References:
- Re: Recommendation on the path forward for EOS
  - From: Dave Shield <D.T.Shield@csc.liv.ac.uk>

Prev by Date: RE: Recommendation on the path forward for EOS
Next by Date: Re: Recommendation on the path forward for EOS
Previous by thread: Re: Recommendation on the path forward for EOS
Next by thread: Re: Recommendation on the path forward for EOS
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread