RE: ISMS working group and charter problems

["Nelson, David" <dnelson at enterasys.com>]

Daniel Senie writes...

> Based on your email, the consensus of the group is that TCP is good
> enough, since it'll only be interesting to manage networks that are
> operating cleanly. I can't imagine that's what the WG really
> concluded, but that's how your email reads.

It seems to me that the existing USM, SNMP over UDP, and a local user
account would be sufficient as a fallback network management method when
the network is experiencing a meltdown.  Just as you have a local
/etc/passwd file on your UNIX workstations, for those occasions when the
NIS server is unreachable.  I don't think anyone believes that ISMS will
obviate the need for at least one local account on managed entities, to
cover this type of situation.


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