[AGENT++] XML Configuration for AGENT++

[Frank Fock]

Hi Marek,

Sorry for the late response. Please find my comments inline.

Marek Malowidzki wrote:

>
>Yes, e.g. we are using our proprietary format.
>
>  
>
That's what others do as well. Have you looked at the
XML schemas at http://www.mibexplorer.com/export/ietf
Do you think that format would be suitable for you?

>>* XML is widely used and there are plenty tools for XML editing.
>>* XML can be precisly validated through XML schemas.
>>
>>What I have in mind for AGENT++, is the following architecture:
>>
>>High Level XML*  <-----XSLT---->  Low Level XML** <---> AGENT++
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>If I undestrand well, the low level format will not require MIBs while the
>high level is (or, could be) bound to MIBs.
>
>  
>
Yes, that high level format could be validated against XML schemas 
generated from
SMI MIB modules.

>My personal opinion is that this "low-level" format should be easy to modify
>by hand. We are using Agent++ for an embedded system where even disk space
>is limited. Thus, we can preconfigure a low-level config file on a
>workstation (where all XML stuff and SNMP MIBs are available) but later we
>would like to be able to quickly modify the low-level files. Binary strings
>could be expressed in hex but most often one uses simple, readable strings.
>
>  
>
OK.

>>The idea behind the above architecture is, that one could use a XML
>>editor or simple
>>text editor as well as a special tool like MIB Explorer to
>>define/provision an
>>AGENT++ agent configuration. An external tool, could then be used to
>>validate and
>>convert the High Level XML into the Low Level XML format. Which could be
>>read by AGENT++ without a too high overhead for XML parser/validation
>>    
>>
>code.
>
>And I believe that the minimum overhead would be great. On our system, quite
>slow one, I admit, it takes really long to launch the agent. E.g., just the
>SNMPv3 configuration seems to cause a visible overhead.
>
>  
>
That's also my primary goal. May be there is also an option to
generate the current BER based format from the low and/or the
high level XML format by an external tool, to improve performance
of agent restarts.

>>This architecture would also allow easy configuration copying from
>>existing agents,
>>as well as replacing the current persistency layer of AGENT++ by a XML
>>    
>>
>based
>  
>
>>layer.
>>
>>What do you, as an AGENT++ user, think about the above architecture?
>>    
>>
>
>Well, we desperatively need something like this. We were considering
>expanding our format. However, if the new feature will be available
>reasonably soon, we would switch to it immediately. Just one question about
>validation (in "SNMP sense", I do not mean XML here). For example, SNMPv3
>configuration is quite "fragile" to human errors. Our simple module provides
>basic checks if everything looks consistent. Is the schema format flexible
>enough to handle inter-table relationships (e.g., will the parses be able to
>detect "dangling" OIDs to nonexistent rows in other tables) ?
>
>  
>
This depends on the level of validation the format conversion utility
implements. The high level format provides everything that is need for
detailed consistency checks, however this cannot be accomplished
with standard XML schema validation alone.

At present I cannot announce any fixed date, but I assume that the new 
XML config
will be available at the end of the first quarter 2004.

Best regards,
Frank