SNMPv3 (RFC 3411 etc.) become STD 62 about 18 years ago. This document specifically talks about SNMP version 1 and 2 (note that 'protocol version 2' is ambiguous, likely the authors mean version 2c). I wonder whether this is by intention (i.e., the authors want to make a point that SNMPv3 is not used) or whether this is an oversight.
Note: I have _not_ reviewed this document, I only skimmed it and stumbled across this. /js On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 02:41:37AM +0000, Tianran Zhou wrote: > Hi WG, > > > > This email starts a working group last call for draft-opsawg-ntf. > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-opsawg-ntf/ > > > > Please indicate your support or concern for this draft. If you are opposed to > the progression of the draft to RFC, please articulate your concern. If you > support it, please indicate that you have read the latest version and it is > ready for publication in your opinion. As always, review comments and nits > are welcome. > > > > The WG LC will end on 9st Oct 2020. > > > > Thanks, > > Tianran > _______________________________________________ > OPSAWG mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg -- Juergen Schoenwaelder Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH Phone: +49 421 200 3587 Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany Fax: +49 421 200 3103 <https://www.jacobs-university.de/> _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
