[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: SNMP improvements
> Add to that the message we have received from the operator community:
That SNMP and the MIB modules are NOT used > > for configuring most
network devices and that it does not meet their needs.
> So I am taking issues with the idea that this is a "political"
> Bert Wijnen
> AD Operations and Management Area.
That's absolutely true,
That leave me the taste of really re-focus in the management Areas WGs,
perhaps, what is going to be in the roadmap of SNMP (mainly
Fault/Troubleshoot) and new proposals like netconf (provisioning) and
SPPI/COPS (qos), CRANE (billing), etc. -few I know-.
For me too many protocols in a 3/4 years period (not without saying that
IMO they are very good protocols), and the bottom line, each group
willing or at some point capable to develop almost all mgmt FACTS. With
all those models the business management spend a lot of efforts
interfacing protocols and Information systems for being able to manage
the network. It may slowdown the operators decisions rather than
accelerating them, or will by bias (e.g. NM suites netconf/SPPI centric)
for a business window opportunity that can go away without leaving them
a solid management strategy. on top of that, DTMF activities around CIM.
Simplifying the picture tree primitives 'get' 'set' 'notify' is all
Even though, SNMP haven't being successful in handling all areas (due
its own restrictions) at least the Information Base and transport was
Would be terrific if IETF can charter some sort of strategies for the NM
Areas in a proactive way for the mid/long term. It may help to
self-answer the SNMP evolutionary vs revolutionary dilemma and scope.
The dynamics are there, just need to learn from the TMN difficulties
with the advantages of the internet evolution.
Just my view