Re: [OPSAWG] Start of WGLC for draft-ietf-opsawg-vmm-mib
The implementation of hypervisors and virtual machines is increasing and there needs to be a way for administrators to view a dashboard on the status of multiple machines. The implementation of this module will be very useful in meeting this need. In addition, this module also supports a rich set of notifications which is equally important. I believe this document will be widely used. -Andy On Jan 29, 2015, at 2:15 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder j.schoenwael...@jacobs-university.de wrote: On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 06:40:48PM -0500, Warren Kumari wrote: The WGLC has concluded with no feedback or comments, and so we have to conclude that the WG is no longer interested in this work. Apologies to the authors, Too bad, this document is actually useful and as far as I can tell technically sound (but then I am co-author and hence this voice does not count). /js -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 http://www.jacobs-university.de/ ___ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg ___ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
Re: [OPSAWG] SNMP SetBulk Operat
Let's take as an example the setting of ifAdminStatus of all interfaces of a particular device to down. SETBULK can work in this example as all data types and values will be the same for all instances for the ifAdminStatus column but special considerations need to be taken on the last PDU. The last PDU will likely over extend the target column object making it fail as the next column can be read only for example. As an alternative, SET operations using multiple variable bindings in one PDU can be used but it is necessary to keep in mind the maximum UDP message size. There is also additional flexibility using this method as each binding can be unrelated. -Andy On Jul 8, 2013, at 12:44 PM, Tom Sanders toms.sand...@gmail.com wrote: Assume that a user wants to create 100 vlans. Instead of using 100 set operations, cant we use one SETBULK operation since in this case its only the index that is different - all other parameters are the same. Toms On 8 July 2013 22:04, Mike MacFaden m...@zimbra.vmware.com wrote: On Jul 8, 2013, at 9:15 AM, Tom Sanders toms.sand...@gmail.com wrote: I hear you when you say that operators might want to use NETCONF. Operators did more than say they might, they wore t-shirts that read: It's the CLI stupid IIRC that was during NANOG 19 conference plus or minus. Regardless of this, i would like to understand the rational (if anybody knows) of only having a GETBULK PDU and not a SETBULK PDU? First of all sets require a layer of security and that took a bit longer to accomplish, not until 2002/SNMPv3. Secondly what would a set bulk do differently than a SET command? Thirdly …. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3512 Mike -- Toms. ___ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg ___ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
