North American Network Operators Group

Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical

[SNMP] Re: HP Openview Slowness.

  • From: Alex P. Rudnev
  • Date: Thu Jun 10 06:38:55 1999

And the worst thing, If someone think _SNMP IS SUITABLE PROTOCOL_ he is 
wrong. In case of CISCO (as an example) we was caused to use boths 'SNMP' 
and 'rsh show ....' methods to get appropriate information. I think 
those who developed SNMP was the childs of the hell (it's terrible 
example of _how you should not develop protocols_; for example, compare

 'rsh -t 120 -l monitor "show ip route"'

request and requesting ip route table by SNMP; compare 'sh interface 
Serial0' and SNMP (10 - 20 different MIB tables with the very euristic 
INDEXES), try to ask _how much BGP router does router have_ or _how mach 
packets was received by ISL sublink_ etc etc. If someone answer _that's 
because of CISCO don't like SNMP_ I can't agree - no, thet's because SNMP 
is wrong protocol at all.

Such protocol should be:

- ascii text based;
- with domain-like names, with the asterisk;
- based on reliable UDP and/or TCP;
- use something like MD5 checksumming for the simple protection.

For example, I'd like to ask

 'BASE 'router'
  GET interface Serial*

and get
 ORIGIN router.interface.Serial1
 in-packets: 223334 u32
 in-errors: 1122 u23
 in-bytes: 124563874 u64
 ORIGIN router.interface.Serial2

(1) TEXT mode, no terrible binary octets, etc etc;
(2) SIMPLE variables, withouth terrible MIB descriptions (they are not 
usefull here);
(3) Another hierarchy (interface.variable, not variable.index)
(4) simple addition private variables 223344
 instead of (as now)

etc etc...

And then, if the protocol (SNMP) is BAD, don't think the tools for this 
protocol should be GOOD.

// And compare this with the WEB interface implemented into some new 
routers and switches - simple, robust, can be used easily, and 100 times 
more flexible. Through it's only simple interfaces with the operator, not 
for the tools, for now.



On Wed, 9 Jun 1999, Scott Call wrote:

> Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 12:51:33 -0700
> From: Scott Call <[email protected]>
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: HP Openview Slowness.
> "Alex P. Rudnev" wrote:
> > If you begin to use commercial soft after free one, then:
> > - don't drop free soft, ypu'll use it anyway;
> I know :) I'm doing HPOV because the 'suits' want a pretty network map on a projector
> somewhere.  MRTG/etc will still be very present in the system :)
> > - increase memory, CPU and disk up to 2 - 4 times (if you had 64RAM,
> > install 512);
> Noted, thanks.
> > - be ready to be disappointed;
> :)
> > Through HP OV is not bad piece of software.
> It's not, but I am disappointed it's not more router-centric.  I appreciate the need to
> monitor workstations, but I've got multitudes more network devices that workstations/servers.
> Thanks for all the responses everyone.
> -scott
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> |Scott Call           |"How could this be a problem in a country where  |
> |Router Geek          | we have Intel and Microsoft"-AlGore on y2 k     |
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aleksei Roudnev, Network Operations Center, Relcom, Moscow
(+7 095) 194-19-95 (Network Operations Center Hot Line),(+7 095) 230-41-41, N 13729 (pager)
(+7 095) 196-72-12 (Support), (+7 095) 194-33-28 (Fax)