Subject: Re: [Isms] ISMS solution seslection procedure

From: Wes Hardaker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 10:18:00 -0700

>>>>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:51:26 -0400, "David B Harrington" <[email-masked]> said:

David> I know the charter says the existing SNMPv3 standard cannot be
David> changed, but the framework is only a theoretical document based
David> on the best knowledge available at the time it was written, and
David> new protocols (e.g. 802.1x) and some paradigms of security
David> management (e.g. RADIUS) have become much more widely-deployed
David> since then, so I believe the architecure might need to be
David> updated to accommodate proposed solutions that best meet
David> operator needs.

I think the ADs have been quite clear that we can't spend the time
needed to do something like that.  Additionally, it was put in the
charter specifically so we couldn't change the architecture because
we needed small additions in order to achieve faster deployment.  I'm
sure that by revamping the SNMPv3 signaling process we'd never hit the
6 month deadline and we'd have to get the charter rewritten as well
(which I doubt is possible).

-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta

_______________________________________________
Isms mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms

---

From: Ken Hornstein <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:30:48 -0400

>needed to do something like that.

That is my understanding as well.  The deadline we've been given is a hard
one, for better or for worse.

--Ken