From owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Mon Feb 4 13:31:09 2002 Received: from babbler.bmc.com (camaro.bmc.com [198.207.223.231]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA02177 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 13:31:08 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.bmc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by babbler.bmc.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g14IXTR21453; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 12:33:29 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id KAA12282 for agentx-list; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 10:26:07 -0800 (PST) Received: (from rpresuhn@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id KAA12276; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 10:26:03 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 10:26:03 -0800 (PST) From: Randy Presuhn Message-Id: <200202041826.KAA12276@dorothy.bmc.com> To: agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Subject: Fwd: Query Regarding SNMP Communication Cc: gangadhar_sabat@yahoo.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi - I'm forwarding a non-subscriber posting to the agentx working group mailing list from gangadhar_sabat@yahoo.com. Subscription instructions are available at http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/agentx-charter.html ------------------------------------------------------ Randy Presuhn BMC Software, Inc. 1-3141 randy_presuhn@bmc.com 2141 North First Street Tel: +1 408 546-1006 San José, California 95131 USA ------------------------------------------------------ My opinions and BMC's are independent variables. ------------------------------------------------------ > Received: from tattler.bmc.com (tattler.bmc.com [172.17.0.117]) > by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id FAA10797 > for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 05:23:29 -0800 (PST) > Received: from mx-us-hou-1-int.bmc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) > by tattler.bmc.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g14DLr006555 > for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 07:21:53 -0600 (CST) > Received: from web9908.mail.yahoo.com (unknown [216.136.129.251]) > by mx-us-hou-1-int.bmc.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 808E320EFC1 > for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 07:24:55 -0600 (CST) > Message-ID: <20020204132455.78753.qmail@web9908.mail.yahoo.com> > Received: from [202.89.67.69] by web9908.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 04 Feb 2002 05:24:55 PST > Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 05:24:55 -0800 (PST) > From: gangadhar sabat > Subject: Query Regarding SNMP Communication > To: agentx@dorothy.bmc.com > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Sir, > I have some query regarding Master-agent Subagent > communication. If it possible please guide me > regarding following questions:- > > 1. As you know some tool kits are available in market > to generate SNMP agent stub code. But some of them are > providing SNMP interface instead of Agentx or SMUX to > communicate between Master-Agent & Sub-Agent. Is there > any problem to go for SNMP interface instead of > Agentx? > > 2. In our case we want to develop a SNMP Master-Agent, > Sub-Agent architecture where Master-Agent will situate > in one card & Sub-Agent will situate in other card > with all these cards having different processor. In > our case which communication is better? If we choose > SNMP interface is there any problem between > Master-agent & Sub-Agent communication. > > Thanks in advance > Regards > Gangadhar Sabat > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Great stuff seeking new owners in Yahoo! Auctions! > http://auctions.yahoo.com > From owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Mon Feb 4 14:00:07 2002 Received: from babbler.bmc.com (camaro.bmc.com [198.207.223.231]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA03067 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 14:00:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from dorothy.bmc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by babbler.bmc.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g14J2Xh25407; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 13:02:33 -0600 (CST) Received: (from root@localhost) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) id KAA12777 for agentx-list; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 10:57:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from tattler.bmc.com (tattler.bmc.com [172.17.0.117]) by dorothy.bmc.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_12836)/8.8.6) with ESMTP id KAA12772 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 10:57:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx-us-hou-2-int.bmc.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tattler.bmc.com (8.10.2/8.10.2) with ESMTP id g14ItOC25980 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 12:55:24 -0600 (CST) Received: from auemail1.firewall.lucent.com (auemail1.lucent.com [192.11.223.161]) by mx-us-hou-2-int.bmc.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 106821FF030 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 12:58:21 -0600 (CST) Received: from md6370exch001p.wins.lucent.com (h135-114-206-50.lucent.com [135.114.206.50]) by auemail1.firewall.lucent.com (Switch-2.1.3/Switch-2.1.0) with ESMTP id g14Iw4m18790 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 13:58:04 -0500 (EST) Received: by md6370exch001p.nse.lucent.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id ; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 13:58:04 -0500 Message-ID: From: "Natale, Robert C (Bob)" To: gangadhar sabat Cc: agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Subject: Re: Query Regarding SNMP Communication Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 13:57:53 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-agentx@dorothy.bmc.com Precedence: bulk List-Id: IETF Agentx Working Group mailing list Hi, > I have some query regarding Master-agent Subagent > communication. If it possible please guide me > regarding following questions:- > > 1. As you know some tool kits are available in market > to generate SNMP agent stub code. But some of them are > providing SNMP interface instead of Agentx or SMUX to > communicate between Master-Agent & Sub-Agent. Is there > any problem to go for SNMP interface instead of > Agentx? AgentX is the IETF standard protocol for SNMP agent extensibility. AgentX defines operations (e.g., registration for MIB/group/table/row/object/instance responsibility, index [de-]allocation, connection management, etc.) that are essential for an extensible SNMP agent environment that are "meta-operations" from the perspective of SNMP itself. AgentX facilitates (and hopefully economizes) the process of acquiring and employing independently developed sub-agents (from multiple sources). The AgentX protocol for master/sub(s) interoperation is generally considered to be lighter-weight (wrt learning curve, processing cycles, and "on the wire" overhead) than an SNMP equivalent. > > 2. In our case we want to develop a SNMP Master-Agent, > Sub-Agent architecture where Master-Agent will situate > in one card & Sub-Agent will situate in other card > with all these cards having different processor. In > our case which communication is better? If we choose > SNMP interface is there any problem between > Master-agent & Sub-Agent communication. AgentX is the IETF standard solution for the generic application you describe. Particular circumstances can define special cases where a non-standard approach might be preferable. Nothing in your description indicates that you have specialized application requirements here -- unless you might want to use a specialized communication protocol between the master and the sub-agents (but while AgentX defines some standard master/sub communication interfaces, it does not preclude offering any others that might work better in a given situation). An SNMP-only approach is almost always feasible -- i.e., can be made to work -- but (1) would need to "re-invent the wheels" in areas where AgentX was designed to roll from the ground up and (2) would most likely incur costs exceeding the cost of an AgentX solution. > Thanks in advance You're welcome...I hope my comments address your questions in a helpful manner...if they are unclear or raise new questions, please let me know. > Regards > Gangadhar Sabat Cordially, BobN AgentX WG Chair