Subject: snmpconf RE: Policy issues: definition of Roles

From: Andrew Smith <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 15:35:48 -0800

And, in particular, you only need to tell the device about those roles that
are relevant to it - that is where the big savings are, I think. e.g.

1. Device A has roles W, X and Y. 
2. Device B has roles W, X and Z. 
3. A policy that references roles W and X should be downloaded to both
devices.
4. A policy that references roles W and Y should be downloaded only to
device A, not device B.

The role combination concept in the PIB was introduced specifically in order
to do this: you have to be able to list only those roles that are relevant
to the policy, not necessarily ALL roles on the device, in a role
combination.

(Apologies if I'm repeating stuff here).

Andrew

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Natale [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, January 31, 2000 3:27 PM
> To: Andrew Smith
> Cc: [email-masked]
> Subject: RE: Policy issues: definition of Roles
...

> That works fine for me.  All I care about on this thread is that a
> "role combination" DOES NOT HAVE to include ALL of the roles supported
> by a network entity/component (although there MAY well be a role
> combination which does incorporate all roles supported by a network
> entity/component).