Dear Joel and Benoit,

Thank you.

Since Joel has invited Benoit, another AD of OPS AREA, to this discussion,
I summarize my question for clarity as follows:

The IESG statement (*1) encourages to remove read-write access to objects
related to configuration from MIB modules.  However, the scope of the
nomenclature "configuration" is not clear to me.  In my understanding,
"configuration" does not contain non-persistent (volatile) changes to objects,
such as virtual machine administrative state (vmAdminState) in our I-D (*2).
They does not affect the configuration but changes state of the target system.
Therefore, I think they are not under "SNMP MIB modules creating and
modifying configuration state" stated in the IESG statement.

Is my understanding correct or not?

(*1) http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/writable-mib-module.html
(*2) http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-opsawg-vmm-mib-00

Hirochika


On May 27, 2014, at 3:55 AM, joel jaeggli <[email protected]> wrote:

> yeah if you want to discuss it with the ops/management ADs and the
> chairs that's fine.
> 
> I don't think there's a reason to involve the whole iesg.
> 
> Thanks
> joel
> 
> On 5/26/14, 10:48 AM, Hirochika Asai wrote:
>> js and Joel,
>> 
>> Thank you for your comments.
>> 
>> I agree that the IESG statement seems to be talking about configuration,
>> but I cannot definitely say that the objects I listed in my previous E-mail
>> are out of the IESG statement's scope.
>> 
>> I think it would be better to move this issue to the IESG, but I don't keep
>> up the procedure.  May I, as an author of the draft, send an E-mail
>> stating this issue to [email protected], CCing WG? Or ask WG chairs to
>> handle it?
>> 
>> Thank you.
>> Hirochika
>> 
>> 
>> On May 27, 2014, at 1:24 AM, joel jaeggli <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 5/26/14, 9:20 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
>>>> On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 08:42:47AM -0700, joel jaeggli wrote:
>>>>> On 5/26/14, 2:31 AM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote:
>>>>>> Asai,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> the IESG statement is here:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/writable-mib-module.html
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> My reading is that it specifically talks about configuration. While
>>>>>> the discussion started with "lets ban all write access", it may be
>>>>>> important to note that the final statement does not say this. Hence,
>>>>>> I am not sure we have to remove the MAX-ACCESS read-write.
>>>>> 
>>>>> some of the vm options do cause me existential peril. The remaining
>>>>> one's however do not. so I think Juergen's assessment  is a correct one.
>>>>> The statement seems to be serving it's purpose!
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Joel, can you please decrypt your message so that it becomes perhaps
>>>> actionable?
>>> 
>>> I'm agreeing with you.
>>> 
>>>> /js
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 

-- 
Hirochika Asai <[email protected]>, The University of Tokyo

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

Reply via email to