On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 02:31:33PM +0200, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
> > 
> > What matters most is reuse of data models. How you ship the data
> > depends on many criteria. All I can say (since we did implement SNMP)
> > is that SNMP works reasonably well on constrained devices.
> 
> Unless you do all your tasks on an embedded device with SNMP (or a
> similar protocol) it seems to be the wrong choice to me since you are
> adding one additional protocol to implement with functionality that
> overlaps the other protocol.  You might have some experience that I have
> not yet understood though (which caused me to start a discussion about it).

Yes, on our constrained devices, we actually do everything via SNMP
(since reading some energy sensors is pretty straight-forward to do
with SNMP). And yes, if you life in a CoAP world, you likely want to
do as much as possible with CoAP. (But then I must admit that we also
did implement mDNS since since it is just so cool to see your sensors
popping up in your mDNS enables applications. Sometimes it is the ease
of reuse of existing stuff that compensates some extra implementation
costs.)

> > But yes, if
> > you live in a CoAP world, you may prefer to ship data via CoAP (once
> > you have worked out the details). What would be a failure in my view
> > is to redo the data models.
> 
> That's an interesting perspective. What data models from the network
> management community do you see most valuable?

If you want to expose basic counters related to your network
interfaces or your IP stack or you want to expose your IP
configuration, then I think we should try to reuse what we have and
not reinvent the wheel. If RESTCONF can be mapped well to CoAP and
constrained devices, this may be an interesting option.

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: +49 421 200 3587         Campus Ring 1, 28759 Bremen, Germany
Fax:   +49 421 200 3103         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>

_______________________________________________
OPSAWG mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg

Reply via email to