On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:51:12AM -0400, Simon Perreault <[email protected]> wrote a message of 92 lines which said:
> As suggested by a few people, we added a section to our draft > evaluating how we stand against RFC 3197. I won't be in Vancouver, sorry, but I've read this draft (background: I work for a TLD operator and we have problems similar to the ones described in the draft). Main comment: I am not convinced by the whole idea of "Discontinuity Time". Isn't the whole idea of SNMP to have dumb agents, often without stable memory, and the manager is supposed to know that, to detect discontinuities and to deal with it? Why is DNS different from typical MIB-II counters, which can go back to zero when the router reboots? Second, the draft requires a mention of RFC 6168, which covers also statistics. Otherwise, the draft seems sensible, addresses a real problem for DNS operators who have subcontractors, and, IMHO, correctly answer the warnings of RFC 3197. _______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
