Differences between SDK and supporting MIB

Document created by cdnadmin on Jan 24, 2014
Version 1Show Document
  • View in full screen mode
This document was generated from CDN thread

Created by: Dustin Morrison on 22-10-2009 09:38:48 PM
Hello, I am just starting on my project of integrating our product into Energywise (as an endpoint device). Can someone please tell me the difference between using the SDK to compile in an Energywise daemon, as opposed to just supporting the Energywise MIB? Is one preferred over the other? What are the pros and cons to each approach? Thank you for your help - Anthony

Subject: RE: Differences between SDK and supporting MIB
Replied by: Brock Miller on 01-12-2009 05:04:59 AM
Hi Dustin, that's a great question.  Implementing the EnergyWise SDK will allow your device(s) to become EnergyWise capable and be a part of the larger EnergyWise network.  With this, you connect to a Cisco domain member and are seen by the network via discovery and queries.  A switch and/or management station(implementing the API) can see you in their EnergyWise query results.
Implementing the MIB would allow you're device to be seen by SNMP management solutions, however, you would not be a member of the EnergyWise domain.  Your device would not be seen by the other EnergyWise domain members and would not respond to queries.  Only SNMP devices could get your information.
To be seen by all management applications, you would obviously have to have both SNMP and the SDK implemented.  Currently, there are more SNMP management applications.  However, we expect that more EnergyWise management solutions will be using the API, which would require your device to have the SDK!
Hope this helps!