[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: proposed row ops requirements
Are you saying `at least as fast' as a `requirement' as potentially
If the relative time for SNMP bulk transfer comes within 20% of other
methods, then I'd be more than satisfied. However, I've no objection to
your stronger wording, or to alternative wording suggested by Lauren.
Maybe given a TCP transport, oid compression, rowOps, etc.working in
concert, then SNMP may actually prove faster than ftp, http, corba for
certain granularities of management information. I can't imagine SNMP would
ever be faster for all cases.
At absolute minimum it'd be nice to distribute management scripts
efficiently within the SNMP rather than rely upon means external to standard
Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
> >>>>> Mark Ellison writes:
> Mark> Setting the bar for SNMP to perform as fast or faster seems
> Mark> unreasonable as a goal.
> I think it is a perfect goal. You need to be as good or better as your
> competitors. This should be the goal. Nothing else. Otherwise, you
> will never even come close to them.
> Juergen Schoenwaelder Technical University Braunschweig
> <firstname.lastname@example.org> Dept. Operating Systems & Computer Networks
> Phone: +49 531 391 3289 Bueltenweg 74/75, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany
> Fax: +49 531 391 5936 <URL:http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/~schoenw/>