Dear Joe,
Thank you very much for your comments. Please find my answer inline.
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018 at 11:50:43PM -0400, Joe Clarke wrote:
> On 10/16/18 15:39, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> > Hi authors and working group.
> >
> > I just had cause to read this document and thought I would share my
> >
On 10/16/18 15:39, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> Hi authors and working group.
>
> I just had cause to read this document and thought I would share my
> comments on the list.
Thanks, Adrian. I have had a chance yo read this new version, and I'll
tack on to your comments. These are my comments as a
of Haoyu song
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 2:11:34 PM
To: Blumenthal, Uri - 0553 - MITLL; Randy Presuhn
Cc: opsawg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Thoughts on draft-song-opsawg-ntf
I don't think we are trying anything "re-inventing the wheel".
First, we didn't invent anything in thi
lto:opsawg-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Blumenthal, Uri -
0553 - MITLL
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 12:20 PM
To: Randy Presuhn
Cc: opsawg@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Thoughts on draft-song-opsawg-ntf
I, as a reader, still wonder about re-inventing the wheel - even with the 1st
paragr
I, as a reader, still wonder about re-inventing the wheel - even with the 1st
paragraph of 1.4 untouched.
Regards,
Uri
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 18, 2018, at 14:12, Randy Presuhn
> wrote:
>
> Hi -
>
>> On 10/18/2018 12:58 AM, Tianran Zhou wrote:
>> Well, the first paragraph in section
Hi -
On 10/18/2018 12:58 AM, Tianran Zhou wrote:
Well, the first paragraph in section 1.4 is neither clear nor necessary.
I would suggest to remove this paragraph. Is that OK for you?
The paragraph does seem clear, but is (in my opinion) incorrect.
However, it appears to be an integral part
18, 2018 12:51 PM
> To: opsawg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Thoughts on draft-song-opsawg-ntf
>
> Hi -
>
> On 10/17/2018 6:37 PM, Tianran Zhou wrote:
> > I do not mean to say the SNMP design is problematic.
> > But I think it's not designed for periodically get
Hi Adrian,
Thank you very much for the comments. I'll try to address all your comments in
the new revisions. Given the time and bandwidth, I may leave some parts (e.g.,
security concern) to future revisions.
Yes, gRPC is a recursive acronym and "g" doesn't mean google although we all
know
Hi -
On 10/17/2018 6:37 PM, Tianran Zhou wrote:
I do not mean to say the SNMP design is problematic.
But I think it's not designed for periodically getting
operational data, which is one important case for streaming telemetry.
That's one of the possible use cases for RFC 2981 or RFC 3877,
and
Behalf Of Randy Presuhn
> Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2018 8:38 AM
> To: opsawg@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] Thoughts on draft-song-opsawg-ntf
>
> Hi -
>
> On 10/16/2018 8:08 PM, Tianran Zhou wrote:
>
> > 2. no customizable periodical and on-change exp
] Thoughts on draft-song-opsawg-ntf
SNMP is a management protocol, not a data transfer one.
SNMP Trap is like a UDP message - send and forget.
SNMP Notify can require confirmation, so you can make sure it reaches it's
destination (or know that it could not).
I rather disagree
but just so that your introductory text has a complete description of the
> pre-existing environment.
>
> Best,
> Adrian
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Tianran Zhou [mailto:zhoutian...@huawei.com]
>> Sent: 17 October 2018 04:09
>> To: adr...@olddog.co.uk
> Cc: draft-song-opsawg-...@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Thoughts on draft-song-opsawg-ntf
>
> Hi Tianran,
>
> Yes, I mean the "Trap" which is now called "Notification."
>
> You're right in your assessment of the drawbacks, and you should add to that
&
.uk; opsawg@ietf.org
> Cc: draft-song-opsawg-...@ietf.org
> Subject: RE: Thoughts on draft-song-opsawg-ntf
>
> Hi Adrian,
>
> Thank you very much for your careful review and comments.
>
> On this discussion:
> "In 1.4 you have
>Since SNMP is poll-based, it incu
Hi Adrian,
Thank you very much for your careful review and comments.
On this discussion:
"In 1.4 you have
Since SNMP is poll-based, it incurs
low data rate and high processing overhead.
I don't think this is quite fair on SNMP. The protocol also includes
Notifications allowing information
15 matches
Mail list logo
