PMP Mail Archive: RE: PMP> Posted Last Call draft of Port Mo

PMP Mail Archive: RE: PMP> Posted Last Call draft of Port Mo

RE: PMP> Posted Last Call draft of Port Mon MIB (10 March 2005)

From: Mike Fenelon (mfenelon@windows.microsoft.com)
Date: Thu Mar 10 2005 - 17:28:41 EST

  • Next message: Accounts Dept.: "Monthly Stats"

    Inline also..

    Mike Fenelon
    Microsoft

    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: pmp-owner@pwg.org [mailto:pmp-owner@pwg.org] On Behalf Of
    Wijnen,
    > Bert (Bert)
    > Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 11:53 AM
    > To: 'McDonald, Ira'; 'pmp@pwg.org'; 'pwg@pwg.org'
    > Subject: RE: PMP> Posted Last Call draft of Port Mon MIB (10 March
    2005)
    >
    > Inline
    >
    >> -----Original Message-----
    >> From: McDonald, Ira [mailto:imcdonald@sharplabs.com]
    >> Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2005 20:19
    >> To: 'Wijnen, Bert (Bert)'; McDonald, Ira; 'pmp@pwg.org';
    'pwg@pwg.org'
    >> Subject: RE: PMP> Posted Last Call draft of Port Mon MIB (10
    >> March 2005)
    >>
    >>
    >> Hi Bert,
    >>
    >> I knew I'd forgotten to fix the four-digit years and that
    >> darn REVISION clause. The uses of DisplayString were all
    >> intentional for strings that can't reasonably be non-ASCII.
    >>
    >Then it makes sense. Migth add a comment about that so that
    >a novice (not as much involved) reader understands
    >
    >> Several years ago, the SNMPv3 WG wasted a lot of time finding
    >> out that using non-ASCII strings in community names mostly
    >> broke existing SNMP libraries - I could certainly change
    >> that one - the 'ppmPortSnmpCommunityName' object was from
    >> the original Microsoft request - these printers and external
    >> network adapters are all running SNMPv1 with no security,
    >> but they seem to use a different read community name for
    >> each printer port - we can't really throw out the Microsoft
    >> requirements, because they're the motivating force for the
    >> MIB.
    >>
    >
    >Well, there maybe broken SNMP implementation that only accept ASCII for

    >community string. But I think you are now swinging the other way to
    >not accept compliant SNMP implementations that DO accept non-ascii
    >charatcers in community string.
    >
    >In any event, I find continued use of community string very scary.
    >Too much opportunity for people to break in.

    [MFenelon] The key here is we are not trying to use Community String as
    a mechanism of security.. We know that doesn't work. It added to this
    MIB because some devices use different Community Strings to segregate
    request to different parts of the device.
    >
    >> I agree with your suggestion about SnmpAdminString. I was
    >> following the usage in the just-published Printer MIB v2
    >> (RFC 3805) where we were told to use a dedicated TC whose
    >> semantics were that a specific SNMP object contained the
    >> language tag (same as here). Should we change these fields
    >> to SnmpAdminString?
    >>
    >I just posted what I noticed. I cannot mandate use of SnmpAdminString.
    >As long as you do things consciously and as long as they are not
    >broken, then it is you (and your group) who decides.
    >
    >> We'll probably accept your comments as Last Call comments,
    >> because we're on a short fuse to start our PWG Last Call.
    >>
    >OK

     



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 10 2005 - 17:29:13 EST