Capwap Mailing List: RE: Certificates, Discovery Request/Reply, and validation.

[Romascanu, Dan (Dan) (dromasca]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pat R. Calhoun [mailto:pcalhoun [at] airespace.com]
> Sent: 23 July, 2003 12:26 AM
> To: sarikaya [at] ieee.org
> Cc: lwapp [at] frascone.com
> Subject: RE: [Lwapp] Certificates, Discovery Request/Reply, 
> and validation.
> 
> 
> > This sounds OK, but LWAPP is discovery + configuration 
> protocol, taking 
> > discovery out, as per Marcus' presentation, SNMP is IETF's 
> protocol for 
> > configuration.
> > How are you going to deal with this?
> 
> One can build products using a whole collection of protocols, 
> and then try to determine what the interactions between each 
> protocol should be handled. For instance, we followed the 
> exact same path with L2TP (and PPTP, of course). would it 
> have been possible to use SNMP to modify modem parameters on 
> the access server? Sure, but it really gets ugly from an 
> implementation stand-point.
> 
> So I view this as the exact same. Yes, one can use SNMP to 
> pull/push information  in/out of the AP, but at what cost? If 
> it requires that we now standardize the interactions between 
> all protocols, that would be even more complex.
> 
> Now that you mention it, why isn't routing established using 
> SNMP? It should cetainly be possible for routing peers to 
> simply push routes using a well defined IP route MIB, no?
> 

To add to this, SNMP is NOT the 'IETF's protocol for configuration'. See RFC 
3535 and the Netconf WG charter. 

Regards,

Dan

>