[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
snmpconf Re: TE-MIB readonly or read/write
NOTE: I have dropped "TE" from this message, as it is not pertinent/specific
Ben Black wrote:
> could you give examples of large ISPs who are asking for additional
> SNMP configuration features? i am not at all a fan of using SNMP for
> router configuration, and i believe that puts me in the majority among
> service provider engineers.
CAVEAT to my answer here: I do not speak for the ISPs I mention below; I only
speak from the basis of prior conversations & IETF meetings.
I don't think there are ISPs who have asked for "additional SNMP configuration
features", as I understand the phrase, so much as asking for more devices to
be able to be fully-configurable using SNMP with appropriate security. On the
latter, I know that UUnet was, at one time, strongly pushing for SNMPv3
implementation by NMS & device vendors so they could deploy it in their
network & get away from command-line interface configuration of routers.
Other ISPs, including at least Verio, have supported that in the past.
There have been discussions about additional (SNMP) management capabilities in
various fora, discussions, etc. such as aggregate objects (including but not
limited to full table rows & full tables), other security models, and more.
Director, Software Development
Longitude Systems, Inc.
15000 Conference Center Drive
Chantilly, VA 20151