Re: monitor schema

["Pierangelo Masarati" <ando@sys-net.it>]

> I'm concerned with the use of the 'description' attribute
> to hold monitored/managed values.   I think it would be
> better to define 'monitored'/'managed' attributes, syntax
> octet string w/ octet string equality matching, to hold
> arbitrary values.  The 'monitored' attribute would be
> NO-USER-MODIFICATION, the 'managed' would, of course, be
> user modifiable.

Do you intend that finer granularity may be later obtained
by deriving specifical attributes from 'monitored' and
'managed'?

>
> For non-arbitrary values, specific schema should be developed.
> Then 'description' could be used for as intended, to provide
> a description of the objection.

or borrowed from existing attribute types, e.g. namingContext
for database suffixes, labeledURI for listeners and so.

>
> I suggest we make this change in HEAD soon for release with
> 2.2.  We could provide a flag (just for the 2.2 release) for
> backwards compatibility to help with transition.

Since most if not all values currently are of 'monitored' type,
backwards compatibility may be provisionaly ensured by giving
'description' the same value of the corresponding 'monitored'
attribute.

I have no objections.  Could you please allocate OIDs
for the purpose?

I'd consider this message a HEADS-UP for those who are
currently using/developing based on back-monitor.

Thanks, Ando.

-- 
Pierangelo Masarati
mailto:pierangelo.masarati@sys-net.it