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

Re: registration OIDs: standardization

To: dbh@enterasys.com
Subject: Re: registration OIDs: standardization
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 15:46:00 +0100
Cc: mreview@ops.ietf.org
In-reply-to: <6D745637A7E0F94DA070743C55CDA9BA489402@NHROCMBX1.ets.enterasys.com>(dbh@enterasys.com)
References: <6D745637A7E0F94DA070743C55CDA9BA489402@NHROCMBX1.ets.enterasys.com>

>>>>> Harrington, David writes:

[...]

David> This would make it easier to identify configuration objects, in
David> response to section 2.1 of
David> ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/internet-drafts/draft-iab-nm-workshop-01.txt:

David> "SNMP does not support easy retrieval and playback of
David> configurations.  One part of the problem is that it is not easy
David> to identify configuration objects. "

I do not think the approach to have status and config branches works.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder    <http://www.informatik.uni-osnabrueck.de/schoenw/>

References:
- registration OIDs: standardization
  - From: "Harrington, David" <dbh@enterasys.com>

Prev by Date: draft-ietf-ops-mib-review-guidelines-01.txt (fwd)
Next by Date: Re: diverging views on adding range constraints in MIB module revisions
Previous by thread: Re: registration OIDs: standardization
Next by thread: RE: registration OIDs: standardization
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread