Re: Methods in the NIM requirements

[Mark Stevens <markstevens@lucent.com>]

<comment inline>

remoore@us.ibm.com wrote:

> Walter,
>
> You've said this twice now:
>
> >Should the semantics of "go" be in the model? If we look at many
> >of the models out there today, all have "go" semantics. However,
> >most are in the protocol itself. The SET command is part of SNMP,
> >not the MIB.
>
> >In contrast, when the model is applied to a management protocol
> >(SNMP), actions are implied by the protocol (GETs and SETs).
>
> But it isn't true.  The semantics of SNMP's SET command itself
> are simply changing the value of a MIB object (attribute).  If an
> SNMP SET is going to have side effects, these *must* be specified
> in the MIB definition of the object being SET.

Bob:
The "go" in your example merely appears to be in the MIB, because the
"go" semantic in SNMP is weak and does not support transactions to the
degree to which it is needed in certain cases.  In fact, the "go"
semantic remains in the protocol, until you employ methods as part of
the model. Only in the case where methods are employed in the model is
the "go" semantic truly in the model and not in the protocol.

-Mark

>
> The *protocol* operation that embodies the concept of an action is
> (not surprisingly) CMIS/CMIP's M-ACTION operation.
>
> Regards,
> Bob
>
> Bob Moore
> IBM Networking Software
> +1-919-254-4436
> remoore@us.ibm.com