Re: [Isms] #1: is it important to support anonymous user access to SNMP?

[Wes Hardaker <hardaker at tislabs.com>]

>>>>> On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:23:31 -0400, "David B Harrington" <dbharrington at comcast.net> said:

>> From draft-hardaker-snmp-session-sm-03.txt: "SNMP message exchange

David> that is authenticated and even private when the session initiator or
David> responder is anonymous."

David> This is a new feature provided by SBSM. Can we establish consensus
David> that a) this is needed or b) this is not needed?

I think it would be nice to have but is not "needed".

-- 
Wes Hardaker
Sparta, Inc.

_______________________________________________
Isms mailing list
Isms at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isms