Subject: RE: agentx X pure snmp

From: Richard Whalen <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2000 08:52:47 -0500

I recently added Agent X support to our "traditional" monolithic agent. We
chose to do this because it would make it easier for others to add SNMP
support in the areas that they need it. With Agent X the support for these
additional MIBs is dynamic - SNMP does not need to be restarted.  Also, a
company that decides to put SNMP monitoring in their product can do it in a
standard way, rather than having to work with many different SNMP agent
interfaces.

Also, if the product is a software product, then there would need to be
communication between the SNMP agent and the actual product. Agent X puts
the management closer to the what is being managed, where there is a better
chance of having all of the information be available and current.  As Agent
X gets more popular I hope that a "standard" set of client routines becomes
available that will reduce the amount of work necessary to exchange Agent X
PDUs.

-----Original Message-----
From: Alexandre Briani Kieling [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 29, 2000 7:39 PM
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: agentx X pure snmp

I have been studying the agentX protocol for six months and I am starting
to write a document about this technology. But I can not just talk
about theory. I need to validate what I say. I mean, if I say that
extensible agents are better than monolitic agents, I have to prove this.

Is the implementation of extensible agents easier than
the traditional way of implement snmp agents? Is there a way to determine
the time spent developing subagents and snmp agents.
Is it true that many subagents have better performance than one big snmp
agent?
Is it better to develop a new module and compile it
with a existent snmp agent like ucd-snmp or is it better to develop a
extensible agent using agentX? I am not sure about it.
Is there any way I can prove that agentX is better?
What I am asking here is a suggestion about how I can compare the two
technologies and validate the results.

Could anyone who developed a extensible agent tell me what type of
information the agent was managing? Is there any situation where only
extensible agents can do the job?

I do not mean to bother you with so many questions.
I would really appreciate any hint.

Thanks for your time.

--
Alexandre Briani Kieling
Laboratory of Distance Learning
Federal University of Santa Catarina
Brazil

---

From: Bob Natale <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 09:59:12 -0500

At 3/1/2000:08:52 AM, Richard Whalen wrote:

Hi Richard,

>chance of having all of the information be available and current.

Excellent summary of the primary rationale behind the extensible agent
approach...with AgentX adding the standardization factor that makes the
approach more economically appealing to all parties.

>As Agent X gets more popular I hope that a "standard" set of client routines
>becomes available that will reduce the amount of work necessary to exchange
>Agent X PDUs.

Producing such an API (or equivalent approach(es)) is an optional work
item of the AgentX WG.  Now that the second rev of the protocol and the
formalizatioin of the initial MIB are complete (in RFCs 2741 and 2742,
respectively), perhaps the group should consider whether we want to tackle
the API issue or not.  I welcome input on that question.  Moreover, if
you could draft a brief outline of your recommended strawman "standard set"
of such mechanisms and post it to the list for review and discussion,
that would be an excellent way to energize the process.  Naturally, the
invitation to post such candidate contributions is extended to everyone
else on the list at this time too.

I hope we see some contribs in the immediate to near-term future!

Cordially,

BobN
------------ ISO 9001 Registered Quality Supplier -----------
Bob Natale         | ACE*COMM              | 301-721-3000 [v]
Dir, Net Mgmt Prod | 704 Quince Orchard Rd | 301-721-3001 [f]
[email-masked]| Gaithersburg MD 20878 | www.acecomm.com
------------- Free downloads at www.winsnmp.com -------------