[eman] Fwd: [OPS-AREA] configuration: writable MIB modules versus NETCONF/YANG modules
Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com> Fri, 14 February 2014 01:41 UTC
Return-Path: <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
X-Original-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: eman@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F29F31A001B for <eman@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 17:41:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.447
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.447 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Cdowr85fUaQ4 for <eman@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 17:41:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from lucidvision.com (lucidvision.com [72.71.250.34]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 966421A0016 for <eman@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 17:41:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.122] (static-72-71-250-38.cncdnh.fast04.myfairpoint.net [72.71.250.38]) by lucidvision.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4A6726EFBB7 for <eman@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Feb 2014 20:41:21 -0500 (EST)
From: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F1065DF2-D9AD-41D4-965F-DDCB9053E94A"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2014 20:41:21 -0500
References: <52FD65DD.4090609@cisco.com>
To: eman mailing list <eman@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <7D762755-7594-4865-82C0-5E2677D6BB35@lucidvision.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\))
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/eman/MbN116E4kY9_wCcdty1qUg0j6ak
Subject: [eman] Fwd: [OPS-AREA] configuration: writable MIB modules versus NETCONF/YANG modules
X-BeenThere: eman@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the Energy Management Working Group <eman.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/eman>, <mailto:eman-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/eman/>
List-Post: <mailto:eman@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:eman-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eman>, <mailto:eman-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2014 01:41:26 -0000
FYI in case you are not on the opsdir list... Begin forwarded message: > From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> > Subject: [OPS-AREA] configuration: writable MIB modules versus NETCONF/YANG modules > Date: February 13, 2014 at 7:39:57 PM EST > To: "ops-area@ietf.org" <ops-area@ietf.org> > > Dear all, > > We occasionally see read-write MIB module proposals within the IETF. > However, the write capabilities of those MIB modules are rarely implemented. > > While discussing this issue with the MIB doctors, we arrive to the conclusion that it's now time to set the direction for future MIB developments within the IETF. Basically, let's not specify read-write MIB modules unless we have a good reason. Read-only MIB modules are still fine though, as SNMP is clearly used for monitoring purposes. > > Here is the statement we came up with: > The OPS area recommends the use of NETCONF/YANG standards for configuration. IETF working groups are therefore encouraged to use the NETCONF/YANG standards for configuration, specifically in new charters. SNMP MIB modules modifying persistent configuration state should only be produced by working groups in cases of clear utility > and consensus to use SNMP write operations for configuration. > Ideally, this should become an IESG statement. > Your feedback is most welcome. > > Regards, the MIB doctors & Benoit > > _______________________________________________ > OPS-AREA mailing list > OPS-AREA@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-area
- [eman] Fwd: [OPS-AREA] configuration: writable MI… Thomas Nadeau