Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 11:53:02 +0100 (CET) From: Andrzej Bialecki <abial@nask.pl> To: Bryan Mann <bmann@whistle.com> Cc: Terry Lambert <terry@whistle.com>, small@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Unified Configuration Interface Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.02A.9810291134310.20293-100000@korin.warman.org.pl> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.95.981028160517.12500B-100000@chaco.whistle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 28 Oct 1998, Bryan Mann wrote: > On Wed, 28 Oct 1998, Andrzej Bialecki wrote: > > But there's one thing here which is still unclear: objects can have > > multiple dependencies, and in reality it matters which one of them is > > followed first.. We need some ordering mechanism here as well. [snip] [This is nice approach - I think I'll add it to the proposal. :-) ] > This means that the daemon must wait IDLE on it's dependencies > to be in place before it can complete it's INIT state and > move onto RUN. > > And to some degree means that the system's startup is dependent > on what is installed or 'active'. Additionally, each daemon > would be capable of reporting it's state to the bootstrapper > so that it could be interegated or debugged in the case of > deadlock etc. Perhaps Terry can look at it from theoretical point of view (I've heard him once discussing graph theories and the likes :-) - but common sense tells me that when you have several objects with mutual dependencies, there is good chance that they will create loops (resulting in deadlocks). So, I think we need to address this issue from start, so that later, when we start implementing it, we know how to avoid them and how to unwind such loops when we create them by some configuration action. Deadlock detector is a good thing, but deadlock avoider is still better... :-) > > > Tracking MIBs raises issues of access control lists, security etc. > > > So far LDAP and SNMP v2, v3 seem to be lacking in these areas. > > > > AFAIK, SNMPv2 addresses this issue quite acceptably. > > > > Ok, but there may be some reason to auth to a particular node > in the tree can SNMPv2 do this? Yes, it can. Andrzej Bialecki -------------------- ++-------++ ------------------------------------- <abial@nask.pl> ||PicoBSD|| FreeBSD in your pocket? Go and see: Research & Academic |+-------+| "Small & Embedded FreeBSD" Network in Poland | |TT~~~| | http://www.freebsd.org/~picobsd/ -------------------- ~-+==---+-+ ------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.02A.9810291134310.20293-100000>