Date: Wed, 28 Oct 1998 22:46:03 +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.9810282228390.10826-100000@korin.warman.org.pl> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSI.3.95.981028123928.12256B-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 Tue, 27 Oct 1998, Andrzej Bialecki wrote: > > > On Mon, 26 Oct 1998, Terry Lambert wrote: [..both agree it should be transactional..] > To pile on ... I agree that there should be a transactional model > and stress that there are as yet uninvented protocols that might be > light weight enough. The important piece of each of the > mentioned protocols that is missing from a management point of > view is "realtime" monitoring. Something we've been faced with > as time goes by here at Whistle is the need to have UI be capable > of monitoring processes in a 'light weight' way. We don't currently > have this solved and I consider it an area of research. I'd > offer that whatever management implementation freebsd-small use > should support this 'monitoring' capability. That's an interesting issue. The key thing here is the protocol, because we can already obtain this info without placing almost any load on the system - the problem is how to notify whoever is listening about the status changes. If I understand you correctly, you mean something similar to the part of "convenience MIB" of UCD-SNMP which allows to send traps when given set of processes behaves such and such, right? > [maybe not related but ...] > On the implementation side it's pretty simple to have a 'container' > for all things that depend on each other and to borrow from object > oriented methodology a better way to think about dependencies > might be to push that out to the objects themselves. > > Example: > > If your web-server daemon needs to know about hostname > changes it should register itself as wanting to receive > "Hostname changed" events. Rather than the other way > around, which is: if I'm managing the hostname let me > kill and restart any daemon that might need to make > configuration changes based on the new hostname. No, this is directly related - I wrote about it in the UCI document, in section on implementation of configuration agent. 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. > > Ugh.. Yeah.... This is pretty extensive list. But you make a good point... > > > > What worries me, though, is that the only one (free) implementation of > > snmp agent that I'm aware of is, well, more than bulky... > > > > 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. 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.9810282228390.10826-100000>