On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Julien Danjou <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 24 2014, Florian Haas wrote: > >> So for any inheriting subclass, the notify method signature is defined >> such that action needs to be a URL. That doesn't make a whole lot of >> sense for anything other than a ReSTful service. If we want to map >> those to SNMP URIs, then there's RFC 4088 that describes that. But >> those URIs, to the best of my knowledge, can't be used for traps. > > Actually you can use anything with URL, we could use something like: > > snmptrap://destination/oid?community=public&urgency=high > > And that would do it. > (not sure about the parameters and all, I'm no SNMP trap connoiseur, you > get the idea)
But that would be another case of wheel reinvention. To me the idea to express an SNMP trap as a URI sounds rather ludicrous to begin with; it doesn't get any more reasonable by *not* using the scheme that someone else has already invented, and instead inventing one's own. What does seem stranger to me in the first place is to require a generic event action to be a URL. What do others think? Cheers, Florian _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
