Re: [Isms] SNMP over (D)TLS draft available for review - Group compliance statements for notifications

["Donati Andrew-MGIA0477" <adonati at motorola.com>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Wes Hardaker [mailto:wjhns1 at hardakers.net] 
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 10:45 AM
To: Donati Andrew-MGIA0477
Cc: Wes Hardaker; isms at ietf.org
Subject: Re: SNMP over (D)TLS draft available for review - Group
compliance statements for notifications

>>>>> On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 10:01:05 -0400, "Donati Andrew-MGIA0477"
<adonati at motorola.com> said:

DA> The tlstmCompliance module is not listing each group with a 
DA> compliance description and was wondering if the implementation of 
DA> notifications are optional or mandatory.

The 4th mandatory group of the the "tlstmComlpiance" object is
"tlstmNotificationGroup" which contains the "tlstmServerCertNotFound"
and "tlstmServerAuthFailure" notification definitions, which are the
only two defined NOTIFICATION-TYPEs.  So they're definitely listed.  Or
are you indicating that there is no surrounding human-readable text
describing the requirements?
--
Wes Hardaker
Cobham Analytic Solutions
  

WH> Or are you indicating that there is no surrounding human-readable
text describing the requirements?

Yes.  They are indeed listed in the in the 'MANDATORY-GROUPs' clause,
but was looking for additional 'GROUP' and 'DESCRIPTION' clauses for
each group.  The 'DESCRIPTION' clause can contain information on whether
or not the group is mandatory or optional to implement, as illustrated
in rfc2580.  When the discussion began on adding tlstm notifications,
there may have been some consideration of not making implementers use
them if they did not have a need for it and was wondering what the final
decision was.

- Andy