Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!hao!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!gateway.mitre.ORG!gross From: gross@gateway.mitre.ORG (Phill Gross) Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip Subject: re: Network Management Message-ID: <8711252309.AA05871@gateway.mitre.org> Date: Wed, 25-Nov-87 18:09:37 EST Article-I.D.: gateway.8711252309.AA05871 Posted: Wed Nov 25 18:09:37 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 29-Nov-87 14:46:32 EST Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Organization: The ARPA Internet Lines: 32 > I don't understand why it is useful to have something which is sort > of vaguely like what we think CMIP is going to look like when it is > done. Either you are compatible with an ISO standard or you're not. > Being sort of close doesn't seem to buy all that much. Ross, I have been informed in private that these days it is a wise business decision to at least give the appearance of conforming to OSI standards. Utilizing TCP and IP is fine because it is already here, but for something that needs to implemented from scratch, I've been told that many vendors feel contrained to an OSI solution. The argument about avoiding development costs by not implementing twice may not be as important as soothing nervous customers about multi-vendor OSI interoperability. If vendors were only concerned with not implementing twice, they might have taken a harder look at the Simple Gateway Monitoring Protocol (SGMP) effort. SGMP is yet a third network management consortium effort that started about the same time as (and has drawn from) HEMS and Netman. At the Boulder IETF meeting, a very impressive real-time demo was given of a PC based SGMP package (with whizbang color graphics) monitoring a real state-wide regional network. My understanding is that C source code is available for tested, interoperable implementations under BSD Unix, MS-DOS and two other platforms. SGMP has been documented in a recent RFC and I think there are plans for it be discussed at the upcoming Interoperability conference. For vendors whose goal is to minimize development costs, perhaps SGMP deserves a closer look. Phill Gross