Re: [netmod] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-bjorklund-netmod-snmp-cfg-00

Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net> Thu, 21 October 2010 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
X-Original-To: netmod@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B15233A693B for <netmod@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 09:27:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.399
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.289, BAYES_05=-1.11, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hjxqdvrfXPPA for <netmod@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 09:27:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.hardakers.net (mail.hardakers.net [168.150.236.43]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 941563A6910 for <netmod@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 09:27:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (wjh.hardakers.net [10.0.0.2]) by mail.hardakers.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 682AA98098; Thu, 21 Oct 2010 09:29:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>
To: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
Organization: Sparta
References: <20101020.153501.236075803.mbj@tail-f.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 09:29:04 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20101020.153501.236075803.mbj@tail-f.com> (Martin Bjorklund's message of "Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:35:01 +0200 (CEST)")
Message-ID: <sdd3r3se5r.fsf@wjh.hardakers.net>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [netmod] Fw: New Version Notification for draft-bjorklund-netmod-snmp-cfg-00
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 16:27:50 -0000

Though interesting and I have no objection to actually following it up
and making it happen, I don't think it's the best use of our resources
at this time.  (That being said, if there is people that want to do the
work my opinion is that the IETF should let the work happen rather than
say "no, not at this time).

For myself, though, it would make more sense to concentrate on models
that operators really need the most, like routing, user tables,
firewalls, etc.  Spending time configuring SNMP will likely only delay
working on the real problems people care the most about unless we can do
them all at once.


[on a side note: I sure get a lot of questions from people about
configuring SNMP using SNMP; if no one is doing it, why am I getting
questions?]

-- 
Wes Hardaker
Cobham Analytic Solutions