Subject: RE: [Isms] Wehn the network doesn't.

From: "McDonald, Ira" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2005 14:28:36 -0700

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]]On
> Behalf Of Sam Hartman
> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 2:54 PM
> To: Wes Hardaker
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [Isms] Wehn the network doesn't.
> 
> 
> * USM provides enough of a solution for the case where the network is
>   not working well enough for the security infrastructure.  
> 
> * Go use something else other than SNMP to fix your network; we all
>   hope the netconf folks solved this problem for us.  If not, we're
>   actually not that unhappy with our CLIs when we get right down to
>   it.  [Yes, this is phrased to spark discussion.]
> 
> --Sam

Hi,

The Netconf folks aren't even trying to solve the problem of fixing
broken SNMP networks.  They are explicitly _not_ addressing active
management (restart, state changes, etc.) of any managed elements.
They're only addressing sending new configurations to healthy
systems.

CLIs over Telnet or out-of-band dialup always have been the main
method used to fix broken large networks.  SNMP never has been
accepted by the operators as a viable solution.  That's the problem
that ISMS WG is supposed to be addressing.

Cheers,
- Ira

Ira McDonald (Musician / Software Architect)
Blue Roof Music / High North Inc
PO Box 221  Grand Marais, MI  49839
phone: +1-906-494-2434
email: [email-masked]

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

---

From: Sam Hartman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 17:43:53 -0400

>>>>> "McDonald," == McDonald, Ira <[email-masked]> writes:

    McDonald,> CLIs over Telnet or out-of-band dialup always have been
    McDonald,> the main method used to fix broken large networks.
    McDonald,> SNMP never has been accepted by the operators as a
    McDonald,> viable solution.  That's the problem that ISMS WG is
    McDonald,> supposed to be addressing.

No, that's not our goal.  Our goal is the create a security model for
SNMP that will meet the security and operational needs of the operator
community.

I find nothing in the charter of the working group that states which
uses of SNMP the operators actually want.

As such, the question of which use cases we care about seem entirely
within scope.