[ntpwg] NTPv4 MIB Revised Version 1.2

[Brad Knowles]

At 8:30 AM +0100 2006-01-27, Heiko Gerstung wrote:

>  You are free to choose what monitoring scheme suits you. I know a lot
>  of people who would have no problems with monitoring a range-limited
>  data object and, if this one exceeds a limit (far away from the maximum
>  of 2147 seconds) have a look at the full range object or use ntpq or
>  another mode 6 tool to investigate what's wrong.

	They might intend to do that, but I think we both know that won't 
happen in most cases where something goes wrong.  The failures will 
be rare and subtle enough that the people who originally put the 
system together are long gone and they didn't do a complete job at 
the time, and the people who come after them don't know what's 
missing.

	IMO, that's just asking for trouble.  There's this legal concept 
of an "attractive nuisance", for which you can be held liable in 
criminal and civil court.  I don't think we want to go down that road.

>  Mode-6 protocol is simply not interesting for most network administrators
>  in the real world, because it is just another monitoring protocol and
>  because their servers, printers, switches, routers and coffee machines
>  (that is the real critical point of failure, believe me) speak SNMP and
>  they just do not want to add a different monitoring style for a couple
>  of NTP servers to their management console.

	People need to understand what's behind the data they're getting, 
and they need to be made aware of any shortcomings in what they're 
seeing versus the real data from which their numbers are supposedly 
derived.  If they don't, then you've got a real disaster on your 
hands when things go "Tango Uniform".

	So long as you keep only one representation of the data in the 
official standard, and that representation is capable of handling the 
range and accuracy of the data to be represented, then any failures 
in the presentation of this data to the user are not your fault, and 
you cannot be held liable in criminal or civil court.

-- 
Brad Knowles, <brad at stop.mail-abuse.org>

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

     -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), reply of the Pennsylvania
     Assembly to the Governor, November 11, 1755

  LOPSA member since December 2005.  See <http://www.lopsa.org/>.