[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: notification charter proposal
On Mon, Nov 21, 2005 at 01:58:09PM -0500, Sharon Chisholm wrote:
> Event Message is a much better term in my books. The system generates an
> event and an event message gets sent. Notification brings up
> connotations of SNMP Traps, which never could have been used to send
> security audit logs or to mirror configuration. I'm not adamant that the
> term shouldn't be used, but it isn't obviously the right one either.
I prefer the term "notification" over other terms such as "event
message" or "event report" which have been used in other places.
I recall that we had a short discussion about this terminology with
Dave Sidor (ITU) at the NMRG meeting in Austin since ITU/ISO folks
have some slightly different terminology but we finally agreed that
the IETF terminology is actually not a bad one. Some of you might
remember that discussion (which by the way led to the information
model vs. data model RFC - perhaps we should have also produced a
document defining terms such events, notifications, alarms, etc).
/js
--
Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/> P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany
--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>