Subject: Re: Event MIB sub agent?

From: Bob Natale <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 13:21:21 -0500

At 11/11/2002:12:00 PM, Wes Hardaker wrote:

Hi Wes,

><...>
>Anyway, the last time I asked this exact same question I got an "Why
>would you want to do that?" answer.  IE, the expectation was that the
>event mib wasn't even intended to be implemented in a subagent.

Yes, it sounds reasonable (esp. from an architectural perspective)
that "generic" services MIBs (i.e., those not directly related to
managed entity operations) might best be implemented at the master
agent level.  Several of the DISMAN MIBs are probably good examples
of what I think would be categorized as generic services MIBs.

>Therefore, the master agent should always do the monitoring of the
>subagents rather than have the subagents do self monitoring of themselves.

Again, I think that approach serves the industry well, both from
an architectural perspective and from an ease-of-implementation
approach (for sub-agent developers).  This is particularly true
of SNMPv3 security.

Granted, additional capabilities must be added to AgentX before
such guidance can be implemented in a standard way (applies to
both the "generic services" and the "security control" guidance).
Carrying that discussion forward should probably be done on the
AgentX list, either now or as part of the future consideration
of AgentX as a candidate Full Standard.

Cheers,

BobN