[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: ipsp-policy-pib
Title: ipsp-policy-pib
Hi,
I have
been reviewing portions of the mib, and have had our engineers look at the mib
for possible implementation. The engineers and I find this mib rather overblown
compared to what we actually need to manage. I believe we offer competitive
feature sets, and expect other vendors will have similar needs for management.
The
mib has lots of knobs we see no use for in our implementation, and we question
whether other vendors will find some of the details necessary. If I were
designing a theoretical database model, I might choose to include all the knobs
and separate tables. As a vendor working to produce easy-to-manage devices, I
find simplicity is better than unnecessary complexity in mib
design.
I have
not had time to do a detailed review and send comments to the ipsp wg, nor have
my engineers. I have asked my engineers to simply send email comments as they
run into items they find less than useful rather than wait until they have time
to do a thorough review. I hope to provide a more thorough review than my
engineers will be able to do, and post my comments to the ipsp wg, but I cannot
guaranteee when that will be. If it moves to Proposed Standard in the meantime,
then I can always file it as an implementation report.
dbh
What do people think of the use of INET-ADDRESS-MIB TCs
in
document draft-ietf-ipsp-ipsecpib-07.txt
See specifically The
ipSecAddressTable
I am sort of too overloaded to do detailed checking
on PIB
documents. At the other hand... strange things are being
done as
far as I can
tell.
Thanks,
Bert