Subject: RE: A question for the group...

From: Al Bergstein <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:04:29 -0800

I'm going to forward onto Simon Muzio, our main DMTF representative, and
discuss with him. I'd prefer that he appoint someone from his team to
represent us, if he feels we have the bandwidth right this moment.  I'm also
going to approach the  program manager of the Internet Security and
Acceleration Server 2000. They obviously have a stake in this. More to
follow, hopefully.

Al Bergstein
Microsoft Corp.  

-----Original Message-----
From: Stuart Staniford [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 30, 2001 5:25 PM
To: Al Bergstein
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: A question for the group...

Al Bergstein wrote:
> 
> Somehow I remember seeing something on this, but can't find it in the
> archives (maybe I'm not looking hard enough).  I haven't seen anyone post
> from MS,so I assume we are not engaged in this effort, though I'm somewhat
> surprised that we don't appear to be. I'll ask on our behalf.

Hi Al:

Welcome!  I believe I have occasionally seen Microsoft folks at IDWG
meetings, but I can't recall anyone from Microsoft making any technical
input to the group before now.

> While I have followed this discussion over the last months, and believe
you
> have done good work on this, I'm interested in the group's thoughts on
WBEM
> and how it might relate to your emerging standard. I totally understand
the
> thoughts that went into  support for the SMI protocol, given that it is
the
> most widely used method for surfacing events today. 

It's not clear that we are supporting SMI to any significant extent.  Glenn
Mansfield has written documents about it, but the working group has taken
no action on them, and the view of the chairs is that they need review from
a broader group of people before it would be reasonable to consider taking
any such action.  The main working group documents are the requirements
doc, the data model/ XML DTD document, and the transport document (though
that last is now uncertain given the WG consensus at the last meeting to
investigate BEEP).

I'm also sure that many
> of you have at least known about Microsoft's work around WMI (for Windows 
> Management Instrumentation) and the Sun's use of the DMTF's WBEM . What
I'm
> curious about is your thoughts on where  the future intersection of your
> work and WBEM come together.

The issue hasn't been raised before.  We have no thinking on it at
present.  Basically, we haven't, to date, gotten much significant input
from OS folks, but only intrusion detection folks.

What do you think we should do?

Stuart.

-- 
Stuart Staniford  ---  President  ---  Silicon Defense
[email-masked]  http://www.silicondefense.com/
(707) 445-4355                     (707) 445-4222 (FAX)