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

RE: snmpconf advancement



Title: snmpconf advancement

Sorry for pulling the trigger on the wrong words. I’m not questioning the value of the SNMPconf work to date, rather an interest in seeing it take the next step towards realizing (or not) a better managed network.

 

Bruce Boardman - Network Management

Network Computing Magazine

c/o Syracuse University

Machinery Hall

Syracuse NY 13244

Lab 315 443-2040 M 516 448-3772

bboardman@nwc.com

 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-snmpconf@snmp.com [mailto:owner-snmpconf@snmp.com] On Behalf Of
Durham, David
Sent:
Thursday, June 20, 2002 5:33 PM
To: 'snmpconf@snmp.com'
Subject: RE: snmpconf advancement

 

Just to be very clear, it has been precisely stated by the IESG with respect to PIBs that the purpose of Proposed status is not to find out how useful something is. If the usefulness of the work is in question, then the IESG would only be consistent by progressing the work to experimental or informational.

 

I believe the criteria there was to ask who is implementing, and who is using it. Demonstrating 3GPP adoption and over half-a-dozen implementations was not even enough to achieve proposed status in the case of PIBs.

 

-Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Boardman [mailto:bboardman@nwc.com]
Sent:
Thursday, June 20, 2002 1:04 PM
To: snmpconf@snmp.com
Subject: RE: snmpconf advancement

 

I'm glad to see this milestone has been reached. I'm interested in promoting the advancement of network management an I'm hopeful that the next step will advance the standard to a Proposed status where we'll find out how useful (or not) SNMPconf is.

 

Bruce Boardman - Network Management

Network Computing Magazine

c/o Syracuse University

Machinery Hall

Syracuse NY 13244

Lab 315 443-2040 M 516 448-3772

bboardman@nwc.com