Subject: RE: AgentX Charter/Milestone Update

From: "Ayers, Mike" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 17:32:45 -0500

> From: Wes Hardaker [mailto:[email-masked]]
> 
> >>>>> On 18 Apr 2001 11:54:23 -0700, [email-masked] said:
> 
> bob> Jun 01 - All open issues resolved (Jun 30)
> 
> There might be a few issues that need to be thought about and
> discarded or acted upon.  Specifically, it is not possible to
> implement certain MIBs inside a strict AgentX subagent implementation.
> Examples are the DISMAN-EVENT-MIB (needs access to authentication
> information and bi-directional requests) and the SNMPCONF-PM-MIB (has
> (will have) a "capabilities" table which is similar in nature to the
> sysORTable (but different, of course) and no way of registering
> entries to it easily via agentx, unless they change their indexing to
> avoid illegal information duplications [which I've requested to them
> that they do]).

	There is also USM, which needs the set of security credentials in
order to support the Own Key Change objects.

	However, I feel that supporting such operations is outside the scope
of AgentX.  I think that such operations belong in a separate protocol, and
that we should consider whether or not to define such a protocol during the
shutdown/recharter phase.

/|/|ike

---

From: Bob Natale <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 02:45:30 -0400

At 4/18/2001:06:32 PM, Ayers, Mike wrote:

Hi Mike,

><...>

See the follow-up from Bert and me re USM in particular.
However, your broader point is correct -- it is likely that some
relevant new work might be identified in the course of the current
business at hand (moving to Draft Status or recycling at Proposed)
and any such *new* work that the WG wanted to tackle would be a
part of the shutdown/recharter decision process.

Thanks,

BobN