Hi Eric,
At 12:04 PM -0700 9/7/05, Fleischman, Eric wrote:
At 12:26 AM +0200 9/7/05, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
I believe that the ISMS WG's proposal is about ADDING the
possibility of SNMP over TCP, not about CHANGING SNMP to use TCP.
UDP will still work.
From: Margaret Wasserman [mailto:margaret@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
That is correct. UDP and the current SNMPv3 USM security mechanisms
will still work. They will also remain mandatory parts of SNMPv3.
Whoa, now, Margaret. Your statement is technically accurate that
traditional SNMPv3 USM will hopefully co-exist with ISMS indefinitely,
and therefore SNMP-over-UDP will remain viable within the historic USM
context. However, your statement is inaccurate within the context of
this discussion, which is ISMS.
I didn't mean to mislead anyone. In fact, I had to re-read your
message and mine a couple of times to figure out what you were
objecting to...
You are correct that, in the current plan, the ISMS model would be
TCP-based. That is what I meant to state by saying "UDP and the
current SNMPv3 USM security mechanisms will still work". ISMS will
be TCP-based, but UDP/USM will still work -- in fact, it will still
also be mandatory-to-implement for SNMPv3 compliance... I did not
mean to imply that UDP/ISMS will work, or even that it will ever be
defined.
Margaret
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf