Re: ISMS working group and charter problems

[Juergen Quittek <quittek at netlab.nec.de>]

--On 9/7/2005 6:49 PM -0400 Sam Hartman wrote:

> > > > > > "Fleischman," == Fleischman, Eric <eric.fleischman at boeing.com> writes:
>
>     Fleischman,> I believe that network management is too important a
>     Fleischman,> functionality to be designed such that it can only be
>     Fleischman,> usable within highly confined environmental
>     Fleischman,> constraints.
>
> "must work everywhere," is a highly constraining environment.

We should consider that ISMS is about integrating SNMP into user
and key management systems.  Such system usually operate over TCP.
In a highly damaged network ISMS might not be able to help you even
if you had stuck to SNMP transport over UDP.

> You certainly may revisit the UDP vs TCP decision on the IETF list;
> doing so is an appropriate last recourse under our process.
>
> However I do not believe it likely that you will get IETF consensus on
> a specific UDP direction.  I also do not believe it would be
> productive to take this issue back to the working group.  So, I ask
> what you believe I should do if you fail to get consensus?  If your
> options are no ISMS or ISMS over ssh, which would you pick?

The consensus in the WG on this issue was not really rough,
but rather broad and clear.

Thanks,

   Juergen

> --Sam
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf



_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf