Re: We need an SMUX standard !!
"Stephen F. Bush" <srchtec!emory!gatech!usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu!JEAN-LU!steve@uu.psi.com> Tue, 26 November 1991 06:28 UTC
Received: from psi.com by NRI.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa12737; 26 Nov 91 1:28 EST
Received: by psi.com (5.61/2.1-PSI/PSINet) id AA13277; Tue, 26 Nov 91 01:21:11 -0500
Received: from uu.psi.com by psi.com (5.61/2.1-PSI/PSINet) id AA13172; Tue, 26 Nov 91 01:16:51 -0500
Received: by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.1.110791-PSI/PSINet) id AA27055; Tue, 26 Nov 91 01:14:09 -0500
Received: from port3.atlanta.pub-ip.psi.net by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.1.110791-PSI/PSINet) id AA27050; Tue, 26 Nov 91 01:13:58 -0500
Received: by srchtec.searchtech.com (/\==/\ Smail3.1.21.1 #21.4) id <m0klw5r-000NvPC@srchtec.searchtech.com>; Tue, 26 Nov 91 01:16 EST
Received: from gatech.UUCP by emory.mathcs.emory.edu (5.65/Emory_mathcs.3.2.15) via UUCP id AA22746 ; Tue, 26 Nov 91 01:09:01 -0500
Received: from usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu by gatech.edu (4.1/Gatech-9.1) id AA10874 for srchtec!uupsi!snmp; Tue, 26 Nov 91 00:58:52 EST
Received: from ncoast.UUCP by usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu with UUCP (5.65b+ida+/CWRU-1.4-UUCPGW) id AA01464; Tue, 26 Nov 91 00:58:50 -0500 (from ncoast!JEAN-LU!steve for emory!srchtec!uupsi!snmp@gatech.edu)
Received: by NCoast.ORG (5.61/smail2.5/03-30-88) id <9111251708.AA22528@NCoast.ORG>; Mon, 25 Nov 91 12:08:09 -0500
Message-Id: <9111251708.AA22528@NCoast.ORG>
Received: by JEAN-LUC (15.11/15.6) id AA27376; Mon, 25 Nov 91 11:49:31 est
Subject: Re: We need an SMUX standard !!
To: uunet.UU.NET!metrix!picasso!venkat@usenet.ins.cwru.edu
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 1991 11:49:28 -0500
From: "Stephen F. Bush" <srchtec!emory!gatech!usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu!JEAN-LU!steve@uu.psi.com>
Cc: SNMP Forum <snmp@uu.psi.com>
In-Reply-To: <9111232131.AA01517@picasso.metrix.com>; from "D Venkatrangan" at Nov 23, 91 4:31 pm
Reply-To: emory!gatech!ncoast.org!sfb@uu.psi.com
Operating-System: HP-UX 7.05 B
Mailer: Elm [revision: 64.9]
> > > There is a draft-ietf-snmpsec-admin-00.txt which describes an SNMP party > which can sometimes assume the role of an SNMP agent. I am unfamiliar with > all the issues, but it looks like widespread adoption/standardization might > solve this problem. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > D. Venkatrangan > Metrix Inc. One Tara Blvd, Nashua, NH 03062 > uunet!metrix!venkat (603) 888-7000 > --------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > If this is the Galvin, McCloghrie, Davin draft, I do not remember anything concerning the multiple agent issue. I'll check again. I remember the "SNMP Administrative Model" draft had something concerning proxy agents. The "native proxy" looks like a possible solution to the multiple agent on one host problem. Any thoughts on this ? Is anyone implementing it ? -- The opinions expressed in this message are mine only. __ ____ ____ _ _ ____ | sfb@ncoast.org /__/ /___/ /___/ /_/ /_/ /___/ | GE Information Services \/\ |/ |//// \ \ / / |//// | /_\/ |/ |/__/ \ \/ / |/__/ | usenet.ins.cwru.edu!ncoast.org!sfb ______________________________________|
- We need an SMUX standard !! Stephen F. Bush
- Re: We need an SMUX standard !! Marshall Rose
- Re: We need an SMUX standard !! Jason Zions
- Re: We need an SMUX standard !! D Venkatrangan
- Re: We need an SMUX standard !! Stephen F. Bush
- Re: We need an SMUX standard !! Stephen F. Bush