Subject: Re: AgentX MIB issue 4

From: Randy Presuhn <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1998 22:14:38 -0700 (PDT)

Hi - 

|From: [email-masked] (T. Max Devlin)
|To: [email-masked]
|Subject: Re: AgentX MIB issue 4
|Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 05:26:57 GMT
|References: <[email-masked]>
|
|Lauren Heintz said:
|>Issue 4: Regarding agentxRegStart and agentxRegEnd, should they
|>be removed and new objects added to more directly reflect the
|>protocol elements?  Should their descriptions be updated to clearly
|>reflect how the values of these objects are derived from the protocol
|>elements?  Should an example table be added to the document?
|>
|>	Status: consensus forming that the MIB should instead
|>	reflect the protocol elements, which would involve
|>	replacing agentxRegEnd with two objects,
|>	agentxRegRangeSubid and agentxRegUpperBound.
|>	Also, detailed examples and/or explanatory text
|>	would be more appropriately placed in RFC 2257.
|
|Given the ongoing difficulty in dealing with registration specifications (as
|modeled by the SMI and translated into the AgentX and underlying SNMP
|protocol), I suggest that the table be reconsidered, with the protocol
|exchange activity being secondary in priority to the granularity of modeling
|table registrations.  If it takes a thousand protocol exchanges to "register"
|an adequate region of certain tables, then it should be considered a function
|of the complexity of SMI models, not inadequacy in the protocol's efficiency.
...

I believe the question is whether the MIB table can adequately and
economically reflect what has happened in the protocol, not whether the
protocol can efficiently handle a specific registration scenario.

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Randy Presuhn           Email: [email-masked]      http://www.bmc.com     
 Voice: +1 408 616-3100  BMC Software, Inc.           965 Stewart Drive
 Fax:   +1 408 616-3101  Sunnyvale, California 94086  USA
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------
 In accordance with the BMC Communications Systems Use and Security
 Policy, I explicitly state that although my affiliation with BMC may be
 apparent, implied, or provided, my opinions are not necessarily those
 of BMC Software and that all external representations on behalf of
 BMC must first be cleared with a member of "the top management team."
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------