DP's comments on "New Book Out"

[WilliamStallings <[e-mail]>]

To: >INTERNET: [e-mail]; >INTERNET: [e-mail]

Dave,

I have always considered it bad form for an author to reply to criticism of 
his/her book. I put the book out there, criticism is fair game, and it is up to 
others to decide whether to buy and/or like the book or not. I am only 
doing it this time because of the personal nature of one of the comments, 
and I promise not to make a habit of using this mailing list for that 
purpose.

1. The reason for including the "historical" chapter on Secure SNMP was 
that several academic reviewers suggested that it would be instructive to 
see this material, which was the result of a lengthy design effort and which 
presents a well-thought-out solution, and which could then be compared 
with the SNMPv2 solution.

2. Several persons with indepth knowledge of SNMPv1 and RMON 
reviewed the SNMPv1 and RMON chapters. As for the SNMPv2 material, 
there were practical problems. The decision to include SNMPv2 in the book 
was only made last fall, and it would have been difficult to find qualified 
people to review on such short notice. Also, those best qualified to review 
were obviously heavily committed in doing the development. I did the 
next best thing, which was to conscientiously read all of the material, 
written and electronic, that was generated during the development of 
SNMPv2 and do my best to get it right. I believe and hope that I did.

3. Dave, you mention "quite a few errors and omissions" without citing any 
of the errors. In a first-edition book of 625 pages, there are bound to be 
some mistakes. I hope to catch these as quickly as possible and correct 
them in future printings; if there are serious errors, I plan to make a file 
available via anonymous ftp and will announce it here. If you do catch any, 
I would appreciate it if you would let me know. The only omission you 
mention is RFC 1215 which describes how to specify and interpret traps 
for SNMPv1. Well, any book is going to be selective. For example, I chose to 
include a lengthy chapter on the RMON MIB. This is just a judgement call.

4. I did, on several occasions, post notices on the SNMPv2 mailing list about 
typos/inconsistencies that I spotted.

5. I have absolutely no problem with these or any other criticisms that you 
care to make publicly or privately, except for those that are, to me, 
unjustified personal rather than professional criticisms. I am not sure what 
exactly you intended to imply in your last paragraph about "giving back to 
the community." You are not saying that only those the actively contribute 
to a project are entitled to write about the results, are you? If so, that is a 
rather limited, and limiting, view of what is appropriate to write about. As 
for my own position, I am self-employed, and my only asset is my time. At 
the moment, my "public" service is limited to providing support to one of 
the comms forums on Compuserve. I do, however, spend a significant 
amount of time providing what amounts to free consulting service to 
students and professionals who contact me as a result of reading one of my 
books. I have no apology to make for the fact that this service is private 
rather than public; it is nevertheless a service to "the community".

Bill Stallings