Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!barmar
From: barmar@think.com (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: SNMP "manageability" ?!?
Message-ID: <1991Feb13.062435.23866@Think.COM>
Date: 13 Feb 91 06:24:35 GMT
References: <1991Feb12.042501.6758@cec1.wustl.edu>
Sender: news@Think.COM
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
Lines: 27

In article <1991Feb12.042501.6758@cec1.wustl.edu> brown@wucs1.wustl.edu (Mike Brown) writes:
>My question is:  Does any router vendor support configuration via SNMP?

cisco routers appear to, although I haven't actually tried it.  When you
enable SNMP you can specify read-only or read-write on a per-community
basis, and also specify an access list to restrict addresses from which
each community name is valid.

>If you think I am naive for using SNMP to configure network elements then
>please let me know...

It's still pretty early in the network management business, and many
vendors are just starting to provide SNMP facilities.  Some have jumped in
feet first, while others are still unsure how it fits in.  For instance, I
don't think any Unix systems are yet shipping with SNMP support (luckily
there are publically-available snmpd implementations, of various levels of
quality).

By the way, I've seen a couple of SNMP posts here recently.  There is a
mailing list snmp@nisc.psi.net on which SNMP is discussed; it includes both
users and implementors.  Send mail to snmp-request@nisc.psi.net to ask to
be added.
--
Barry Margolin, Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com
{uunet,harvard}!think!barmar