Re: Final BOF Agenda?

[Aiko Pras <pras@ctit.utwente.nl>]

Hi Juergen (and others)

Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:

> The question which remains to be discussed is how useful such an
> automated translation really is. Sure, you get access to MIB data in
> XML format which is easier to process for many people. Bulk transfers
> become easier since you usually assume TCP as a transport. However,
> with an automated translation, you do not really make any steps
> forward to overcome the semantic mismatch between the low-level
> data-centric MIB models and the more task-oriented models operators
> seem to prefer. This also has to do with naming and references which
> are implemented by some kind of pointers in MIB modules, where you
> can't really hide MIB specifics when doing automated translations.
> Perhaps it is more useful to do half-automated translations where MIB
> augmentations are defined for translation purposed to derive XML
> schemas that are closer to the underlying conceptual model.

My feeling is that automatic translation allows for a smooth transition from 
the current situation (based on SMI MIBs) towards a future one (with XML 
schema, WSDL & SOAP?). So, despite the fact that we will have new technology 
to describe and move management data, we will still be able to operate on 
the same management information as before (the information that we agreed on 
and standardised). What I expect is that after some time new XML schema will 
be developed to overcome the semantic mismatch you mentioned above. It will 
take some time however until these new schema will be standardised. Until 
that happens we can use the old, translated information.

Aiko


--
to unsubscribe send a message to xmlconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/xmlconf/>