Subject: Re: [midcom] SNMP - using as a transport layer?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 11:26:02 -0500

On 06/21/2002, at 09:32:17 A.M., Martin Steirmerling wrote, in part:

>  SNMP is a management protocol that is successfully used for
>  more than a decade and it is built into most of today's
>  IP devices.

I *WISH* my home gateway / router had SNMP for management. My experience
is that most of these devices, which are, IMHO, one of the largest
populations of devices that are MIDCOM "candidates", use HTTP rather
than SNMP for management.

> Why do you assume it would not be very well suited for
> performing management tasks?

I guess I don't see MIDCOM's use between applications / agents and
middleboxes as a management activity, more of an operational activity.

The issue to my mind here is do we:
a) take an existing protocol that has the basic transport, security,
   etc., requirements satisfied but has no capabilities for middlebox
   operation, and add those; or
b) take an existing protocol that has middlebox operational capabilities
   but does not completely satisfy the secutiry requirements, and beef
   up the security.

It seems to me that the latter is a more appropriate course of action for
this group. But I could be wrong. :-)

Jim

_______________________________________________
midcom mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2002 13:01:00 -0400

> than SNMP for management.

MIDCOM isn't going to solve any problems for home networks anyway.
The best that can be hoped for is for MIDCOM to solve problems for
the few server apps that can afford to add MIDCOM support.

The only way to solve the problem in general is to get rid of NATs.
It's important to not lose sight of this.

Keith