Internet Info 1997 December/Internet_Info_CD-ROM_Walnut_Creek_December_1997.iso/ietf/ifmib/ifmib-minutes-93jul.txt

Text File | 1993-09-10 | 6KB | 142 lines

CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_

Reported by Theodore Brunner/Bellcore

Minutes of the Interfaces MIB Working Group (IFMIB)

The group's discussions were based on the ``Evolution of the Interfaces
Group of MIB-II'' Internet-Draft.  The version dated 1 June was
discussed first, followed by discussion of additional issues in the 28
June version.  The discussion was a continuation of issues raised on the
mailing list.

Although only one session had originally been scheduled for IFMIB, a
second session was scheduled ad hoc.  The only other group from the
Network Management Area whose schedule conflicted with the second
session was UPSMIB.

The group did not have time to discuss issues such as a generic approach
to virtual connections.  However, this particular subject was also
expected to be addressed at the meetings for the FRNETMIB and ATOMMIB
Working Groups.

Discussion Topics:

1. ifNumber, ifName (section 3.2.1)
Resolution: Current text is OK.

2. ifStack, ifTable concerns  (section 3.2.2)
Resolution: ifStack is OK. Interface specific MIBs should clarify how
ifTable is used. I-D language will be drafted by editors.

3. Virtual Circuits (section 3.2.3)
Resolution: Caralyn Brown will suggest a less controversial example.
Not considered possible to add further text to clarify the circumstances
under which a virtual circuit may be considered an interface.

4. linkUpDownEnable (in section 5.)
Resolution: Confirmed that the default layer generating linkUp
and linkDown is the lowest layer.

5. Do we want to deprecate objects in ifTable (in section 5)
Resolution: Yes, want to consider candidates.
Objects                             Resolution
- ifType, ifSpecific                Unresolved. A possible
                                    replacement will be
                                    discussed on the mailing
                                    list (by draft editors.)
- ifPhysAddr change to macAddress   Keep as is.
- ifNUCast                          Discussion deferred.
- ifOutQLen                         No general agreement that
                                    this object is useful.
                                    Proposal will be made on
                                    the mailing list (by Fred Baker
                    and Jon Saperia.)

6. 64 bit Counters
There was a suggestion to have two conformance classes for
ease of management stations.
Resolution: Tentative agreement to have 3 conformance classes:
a) <20Mbps (32 bit Counters)
b) >20Mbps (64 bit character Counters)
c) >650Mbps (64 bit packet Counters)
Because of 1 hour wrapping time of counters, and ease of agent.
Resolution: No 64bit error counters.

7. ifHighSpeed (section 3.2.6)
Resolution: Accepted

8. Support of ifExtns (from RFC1229)
There has been some modest implementation of RFC 1229
expressed by two members of the WG.
Ted Brunner will poll the ietf mailing list for any other
implementation experience with it.

Agreement was reached about the objects in Sections 8.1-8.3,
but these agreements will be verified on the mailing list.
Ted Brunner will send out the appropriate messages pointing out
the level of agreement on these issues,
and poll the mailing list for any dissagreements.

8.1. ifExtnsTable
Resolution: ifExtnsRevWare, ifExtnsChipSet are deleted.
ifExtnsPromiscuous is kept.
Place it into the packet compliance group,
and move its oid into the ifTable, and remove Extns from its new name.

8.2. ifExtnsTestTable
Resolution: Will be kept as optional.
Interface-specific MIBs may define tests that use this table,
in which case an appropriate conformance statement is included in that MIB.
Community, RequestId and COntext will be replaced with a testAndIncrement.
The objects will be given new names (without Extns.)

8.3. ifExtnsAddrTable
Resolution: Will be kept as optional.
Interface-specific MIBs should define whether and how this table
should be used,
in which case an appropriate conformance statement is included in that MIB.

9. prototype or proposed
Resolution: this mib will not be considered for prototype status,
only for proposed.
Other mibs depend on it.


Attendees

Masuma Ahmed             [e-mail]
David Arneson            [e-mail]
Fred Baker               [e-mail]
Jim Barnes               [e-mail]
Caralyn Brown            [e-mail]
Tracy Brown              [e-mail]
Theodore Brunner         [e-mail]
Jeff Case                [e-mail]
Chris Chiotasso          [e-mail]
Dave Cullerot            [e-mail]
David Engel              [e-mail]
David Fresquez           [e-mail]
Steven Horowitz          [e-mail]
Frank Kastenholz         [e-mail]
Andrew Knutsen           [e-mail]
Deirdre Kostick          [e-mail]
Kent Malave              [e-mail]
Keith McCloghrie         [e-mail]
Henri Moelard            [e-mail]
George Mouradian         [e-mail]
Kenneth Rodemann         [e-mail]
Dan Romascanu            [e-mail]
Rick Royston             [e-mail]
Jon Saperia              [e-mail]
Jean-Bernard Schmitt     [e-mail]
Kitty Shih               [e-mail]
Timon Sloane             [e-mail]
Suzanne Smith            [e-mail]
Kaj Tesink               [e-mail]
Mario Vecchi             [e-mail]
Steven Waldbusser        [e-mail]
Scott Wasson             [e-mail]
James Watt               [e-mail]