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

RE: Methods in the NIM requirements

I think Keith's point is accurate (and I phrased my point poorly), SNMP
assumes a memory map model. Therefore, the protocol *and* the data
structures assume an interactive relationship with the device (a "go" in
Andrea's terms). But I think we are refining the parameters of the question
without discussing the question directly. If the NIM model implies a "go"
semantic, how is the model applicable to the directory. If I have a method
for reboot that means do it now, how do I represent the current state
(rebooting/(re)initializing/unavailable) of the machine  in a directory.
"Go" implies real-time semantics, yet we all know that directories are not
well suited for real-time status representations.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: remoore@us.ibm.com [mailto:remoore@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 7:40 AM
> To: Weiss, Walter
> Cc: nim@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Methods in the NIM requirements
> 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.
> 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