>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. Yes, Margaret, we are tracking each other on that point. However, the nature of my objection was that I believe that this state of affairs is unacceptable. Since I have concluded, for the reasons I partially enumerated in my previous post, that historic SNMPv3 USM is unusable for very large deployments, what good is devising an ISMS supplement that is also partly/largely unusable for different reasons (i.e., transport reasons (ISMS) rather than security reasons SNMPv3 USM))? I believe that network management is too important a functionality to be designed such that it can only be usable within highly confined environmental constraints. _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf