[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: snmpconf FW: MIBs for events and notification logging



Bert, one follow up. Persistence of configuration data is dealt with a
bit in the BCP. Persistence of alarm data is, a bit differenet in
my view. I just posted to the DISMAN list that I thought the alarm MIB
or even that in combination with an implementation of the LOG MIB is too
heavy weight for notifications sent from a device. Perhaps the problem
could be broken down into two parts. Work on a conformance statement
with some restructure might do the trick for the Alarm MIB. 

With regard to the configuration aspect, I recall a discussion at
an SNMPCONF WG meeting a couple of IETFs ago about configuration
persistence. I do no know where that went, if anywhere. Was there
something that should have happened that did not?

/jon
> The idea of my email was more to stimulate the WG
> to try and address the issue of persistence of
> configuration data and event data.
> 
> If the MIB that is out of the DISMAN WG is no good,
> then that topic should be discussed in the DISMAN WG.
> 
> Or so I think.
> 
> Bert 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: David T. Perkins [mailto:dperkins@dsperkins.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 8:42 PM
> > To: snmpconf@snmp.com
> > Subject: Re: snmpconf FW: MIBs for events and notification logging
> > 
> > 
> > HI,
> > 
> > Using the log MIB found in RFC 3014 would be a good choice
> > if it was a well designed MIB module. But I believe it has
> > enough problems to render it unusable except for simple
> > cases. I'll willing to demonstrate this by writing an
> > implementation report if I can get access to a device
> > that supports the log MIB. And I'm willing to work together
> > with anyone who also has interest. Anyone that knows of
> > an implementation, please send me the version of the system
> > software and the device.  (If I don't have access
> > to one of the devices, then I'll need some help in getting
> > access.)
> > 
> > Regards,
> > /david t. perkins
> > 
> > On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
> > 
> > > FYI and possible actions
> > > 
> > > Bert 
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Wijnen, Bert (Bert) [mailto:bwijnen@lucent.com]
> > > Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2001 7:15 PM
> > > To: IESG
> > > Subject: MIBs for events and notification logging
> > > 
> > > 
> > > All, while discussing the frnetmib documnet, we talked about
> > > how to handle data (events) that should be persistent.
> > > 
> > > In general, managed devices do not keep such persistent
> > > information. Instead, they send notifications, that is
> > > traps or informed (if enabled by configuration), to one
> > > or more management stations. The management stations/apps
> > > would keep the data in a persistent database. Also, managers
> > > will poll devices to obtain status/usage info and save that
> > > in a persistent database.
> > > 
> > > Events/notifications may not be delivered to a manager
> > > if there are network problems. In that case, usage of the
> > > event mib (RFC2981) or the notification log mib (RFC3014)
> > > can keep such data at a managed device for a while.
> > > 
> > > Does this explain enough?
> > > 
> > > I will post to SNMPCONF WG to stimulate that they include
> > > something in the SNMP BCP that they are working on
> > > 
> > > Bert 
> > > 
> > 
> 

Thanks,
/jon
--

Jon Saperia		     saperia@jdscons.com
			     Phone: 617-744-1079
			     Fax:   617-249-0874
			     http://www.jdscons.com/