Dave, my gosh, I've never seen the sarcastic side of you before. :)
Regards, /gww
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org]
> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 16:09
> To: 'C. M. Heard'; 'Mreview (E-mail)'
> Subject: RE: 32-bit and 64-bit counters (fwd)
>
> [sarcasm on]
> Then maybe we should change the mib-review-guidleines to insist that
> all ietf mibs be written in smiv1 and all communications to be using
> snmpv1, to standardize best current practices, based on this survey.
>
> Maybe we should close ISMS and other SNMPv3-related WGs, and start to
> deal with the reality that operators prefer SNMPv1 to SNMPv2c and
> SNMPv3, and change all mib-related ietf charters to have them do their
> work in smiv1, so we can focus on developing only solutions that work
> with snmpv1 and smiv1. We've given the operator community ten years to
> migrate to SMIv2, and six plus years to migrate to SNMPv2c and SNMPv3.
> Apparently they are not interested in migrating to the designs that
> were meant to resolve the problems they had complained about.
>
> Maybe we should declare SMIv2 and SNMPv2c and SNMPv3 historic, and
> encourage the use of SMIv1 and SNMPv1.
> [sarcasn off]
>
> If people want to use interfaces/mib modules that require 64-bit
> counters, they should migrate to SMIv2-capable products. Let's NOT
> design snmpv1 and smiv1 solutions when there are standards already
> published for providing this functionality.
>
> dbh
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org]
> On Behalf Of C. M. Heard
> Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 3:44 PM
> To: Mreview (E-mail)
> Subject: RE: 32-bit and 64-bit counters (fwd)
>
> The one survey that I saw on this subject (which was admittedly a long
> time ago) said that the level of deployment of SNMPv2c was much less
> than that of SNMPv1. So it's not necessarily pointless.
>
> On Thu, 28 Oct 2004, David B Harrington wrote:
> > I concur.
> >
> > dbh
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-mreview@ops.ietf.org]
> > On Behalf Of Juergen Schoenwaelder
> > Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2004 7:17 AM
> > To: David T. Perkins
> > Cc: C. M. Heard; Mreview (E-mail)
> > Subject: Re: 32-bit and 64-bit counters (fwd)
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 27, 2004 at 09:44:42PM -0700, David T. Perkins wrote:
> >
> > > It's find with me as long as it will be possible for me to update
> > > and submit the old I-D I did on adding support for
> > > Counter64 in SNMPv1 as an informational RFC.
> >
> > I believe Counter64 is SNMPv1 is pointless since we have SNMPv2c.
> >
> > /js
> >
> > --
> > Juergen Schoenwaelder International University Bremen
> > <http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/> P.O. Box 750 561, 28725
> Bremen,
> > Germany
>
>
>
>
>