Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-system-mgmt
"ietfdbh" <ietfdbh@comcast.net> Fri, 13 December 2013 17:38 UTC
Return-Path: <ietfdbh@comcast.net>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18A111ADF7E for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:38:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 RqFyCA251Pi7 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:38:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [IPv6:2001:558:fe14:43:76:96:62:17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07E2F1ADF70 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 09:38:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from omta05.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.43]) by qmta10.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 11n11n0060vyq2s5A5e15C; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:38:01 +0000
Received: from JV6RVH1 ([67.189.237.137]) by omta05.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id 15e01n00o2yZEBF3R5e1Qo; Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:38:01 +0000
From: ietfdbh <ietfdbh@comcast.net>
To: 'Martin Bjorklund' <mbj@tail-f.com>, lhotka@nic.cz
References: <B386C034-A59A-4374-9846-6F2F821A0941@nic.cz> <CABCOCHTD_8kqHvqZGE8x1-bAWYZ4-1vRRXLpqdSRLH+tQV3eow@mail.gmail.com> <m2sitxoy68.fsf@nic.cz> <20131213.121509.688716145908885068.mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <20131213.121509.688716145908885068.mbj@tail-f.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 12:37:57 -0500
Message-ID: <010501cef82a$101f6190$305e24b0$@comcast.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQKqL//JvrIVXxVh2Om29tt5U964mAHCAgUrAkJ4W0kAfEe0GJh36O6A
Content-Language: en-us
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=comcast.net; s=q20121106; t=1386956281; bh=ClWbMFaMcXBu42KAsd0njTj+nPrAYOIpDaJ3URcB28E=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type; b=AR4XmQpOjfvqmcmYI+8/wduEbtB1WJdTyaUd/2nMGjBhShD9Gqm2hn28j2jp+V3Dn guyaqCtdR6+Y4bQzl8Yb+P4VOzOiRm6+OW+G5ioXr+OtRYxSagoVzTc7JZVfYjv9tN 7vJ9CuTCCzowfMFc9hLzB4G6QBnkuFtFNo5rSp05g7L5B0lDrb8wcHTiMkRXAjYMvP 5YGM6BfTWQgOxSvE3Qn50DWqekgTfZ41cqq4N9BfrfOLzRKEdN/zgsF2mf5cLwnQWJ BMEPcQI0GxQQAKL97BqOjtKLQu9541CfKs4MFamKMiovpzWiYV3Mznv/GeGIwFUqPK sEXERewTwYXuA==
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-system-mgmt
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 17:38:10 -0000
Hi, I agree with the approach of treating these as separate objects, both as an SNMP greybeard and as an (ex-)NMS developer. Following the general philosophy of good MIB design, keep the agent simple and let the NMS handle complexity. That is normally seen with the following design guideline: "Exclude objects that are simply derivable from others in this or other MIB modules." But would also include handling correlation/synchronization between MIB queries and YANG queries - let the NMS handle that. Soapbox: [Originally the IAB recommended having one data modeling language and one virtual database of management objects, accessible by multiple protocols. But that approach was found to be unrealistic, because the SMI became outdated - it cannot effectively model some aspects of real-world device implementations, such as nested tables, and would seriously limit the functionality of non-SNMP protocols like NETCONF and ipfix and syslog. While it would be nice to be able to access MIB data via other protocols, sometimes that just isn't going to be viable without hampering new models with outdated syntax and data structures. When that is the case, I think we need to move on and use the new, more capable DMLs.] David Harrington ietfdbh@comcast.net +1-603-828-1401 > -----Original Message----- > From: netmod [mailto:netmod-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Martin > Bjorklund > Sent: Friday, December 13, 2013 6:15 AM > To: lhotka@nic.cz > Cc: netmod@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-system-mgmt > > Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> wrote: > > Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com> writes: > > > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> just an idea: would it help if the server simply records the mapped > > >> DisplayString version in state data? > > >> > > >> > > > No. I am OK with the proposal to force the server to constrain the > > > objects > > > > Why not, actually? I mean something like this: > > > > { "system-state" : { > > ... > > "location" : "Schrödingerstraße", > > "mib:sysLocation" : "Schroedingerstrasse", > > ... > > } > > > > This is similar to what Randy proposed with "legacy-location", but it > > is in *state*, so it doesn't introduce a second configuration object. > > But why report the MIB object at all in this case? > > If we decide these objects are really separate, I don't see the need > to report the MIB object. A manager that wants to see the SNMP object > in addition to the NETCONF object (for some reason) can use SNMP. > > > /martin > _______________________________________________ > netmod mailing list > netmod@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Martin Bjorklund
- [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-system-mg… Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Benoit Claise
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… ietfdbh
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… ietfdbh
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Juergen Schoenwaelder
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Andy Bierman
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… ietfdbh
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Randy Presuhn
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Martin Bjorklund
- Re: [netmod] AD review of draft-ietf-netmod-syste… Juergen Schoenwaelder