Re: Community strings/IP Addr

Manu Kaycee <kaycee@ctron.com> Wed, 22 July 1992 22:49 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-chassismib>
Received: by CS.UTK.EDU (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA09679; Wed, 22 Jul 92 18:49:57 -0400
Received: from nic.near.net by CS.UTK.EDU with SMTP (5.61++/2.8s-UTK) id AA09675; Wed, 22 Jul 92 18:49:55 -0400
Received: from [134.141.2.2] by nic.near.net id aa17933; 22 Jul 92 18:49 EDT
Received: from cardinals.ctron by ctron.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA00379; Wed, 22 Jul 92 18:46:30 EDT
Received: from vishnu.ctron by cardinals.ctron (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA01512; Wed, 22 Jul 92 18:47:59 EDT
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 18:47:59 EDT
From: Manu Kaycee <kaycee@ctron.com>
Message-Id: <9207222247.AA01512@cardinals.ctron>
To: arneson@ctron.com, chassismib@cs.utk.edu
Subject: Re: Community strings/IP Addr
Cc: kaycee@ctron.com




> 
> Since we are moving in the direction of party based SNMP and there will
> be a limited number of implementations of the MIB using community
> based SNMP.  I vote to remove the community string and the IP address
> from the chasEntityTable as Keith suggested.
> 
> Any complaints/ comments from anybody else?
> 
> /David Arneson (arneson@ctron.com)
> 

Since the migration to party-based SNMP would occur over time, and that
community-based SNMP will be with us for a bit, I suggest we maintain the
community string/IP Address combo.



/Manu.