[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: why i should like pibs
Sounds to be the wise approach... Can't agree more.
From: Man.M.Li@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:Man.M.Li@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2002 11:02 PM
To: randy@xxxxxxx; rap@xxxxxxxxxxxx; diffserv@xxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: why i should like pibs
David Durham's list is comprehensive enough. How much more does IESG need?
Since as many indicated that it is probably pointless to re-open all the
discussions, why can't we just move the Framework and Diffserv PIBs to ps
and let the market decide the usefulness of PIBs instead of trying to decide
for the market?
From: ext Randy Bush [mailto:randy@xxxxxxx]
Sent: March 18, 2002 09:13 AM
To: rap@xxxxxxxxxxxx; diffserv@xxxxxxxx
Subject: why i should like pibs
wearing my iesg hat but being just a stupid operator, i am trying to
understand the pib/mib controversy. fyi, i currently use snmp heavily
for monitoring devices on my network. i configure using large db-driven
code and spew text-based cli to the devices.
let's assume i want to take the leap to a binary, as opposed to textual,
configuration language. i.e. for some reason(s) [which we will PLEASE
NOT discuss here] i decide to move from pushing text-based cli configs
out to pushing a binary format.
hence, i would have to push my vendors to implement snmp/cops writes for
all configuration aspects of all devices. this would be big cost for
both me and for my vendors.
why would cops/pibs be significantly better (remember it has to replace
my current investment, so it can not be 'just as good') than snmp/mibs?
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information, including without
limitation, Confidential and/or Proprietary Information belonging to
Unisphere Networks, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original