Internet Info 1994 March/Internet Info CD-ROM (Walnut Creek) (March 1994).iso/inet/ietf/93mar/area.netmanagement.93mar.txt

Text File | 1993-04-16 | 7.6 KB | 146 lines

Editor's note:  Minutes received 4/10/93.  These minutes have not been edited
                and the attendee list has not been appended.

Network Management Area

Area Summary reported by Marshall Rose/Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.

The Working Groups and BOFs met in Columbus:

    Chassis MIB WG            Frame Relay Network MIB BOF
    FDDI MIB WG            IFIP Electronic Mail Management BOF
    HUB MIB WG            Mail and Directory Management BOF
    TRMON WG            Managing ATM with SNMP BOF
    UPS MIB WG            Modem Management BOF
                    SNA Systems Management BOF
                #######

Chassis MIB Working Group (CHASSIS)

    Progress continues but remains slow.  The group discussed a presentation
    on generalization of the MIB model as introduced at the previous meeting
    and partly integrated into the draft.  There was fair consensus, but some
    unsureness of understanding.  The new model will be integrated into the
    draft, and group members must check their chassis implementations against
    it.  A developer reported experience implementing the proposed Chassis
    MIB, mostly positive, with a few suggestions.

FDDI MIB Working Group (FDDIMIB)

    The working group reviewed the current Internet-Draft.  Several
    minor revisions were made.  There was consensus that a new I-D be
    posted, briefly reviewed by the mailing list, and then submitted for
    consideration as a proposed standard.  There was some interest in a
    traps document.  A strawman will be developed.

IEEE 802.3 Hub MIB Working Group (HUBMIB)

    The HUB MIB Working Group met Wednesday morning to discuss minor issues
    concerning both the MAU MIB Internet Draft (3/22/92) and Repeater MIB Prop
    Std (RFC1368).  All issues were resolved in principle, with exact working
    of changes to be done by the editors The editors will then mail new drafts
    of both documents to the Working Group mailing list for 3 weeks review.
    If no unresolved issues surface during that time, the MAU MIB will be
    submitted to the IESG for consideration as Proposed Std, and the Repeater
    MIB will be submitted to the IESG for consideration as Draft Std.  (Note
    that nine implementors of Rptr MIB were represented at the meeting, and
    the Working Group agreed that the implementation and operational
    experience with Rptr MIB was more than sufficient to warrant its
    forwarding to Draft.)

Token Ring Remote Monitoring Working Group (TRMON)

    The Token Ring RMON working group met for one session.  At that session,
    the final outstanding technical issues for the draft were identified and
    resolved.  There was consensus that the resulting draft should be
    submitted to the Network Management Directorate for eventual publication
    as a proposed standard. The group then discussed priorities for future
    work and where a next meeting might take place.  There was no clear
    resolution on these issues.  Finally, in the remaining minutes, a few
    implementation issues for RFC1271 were discussed.

Uninterruptible Power Supply Working Group (UPSMIB)

    A review of the strawman document published just before the meeting became
    a discussion of a single counter for line failures, which took most of the
    meeting before deciding that "failures" counted would be vendor specific,
    as there was no common ground (not speaking electrically).  The discussion
    turned briefly to the model for input lines, with consensus and
    instructions to the editor.  One vendor reproposed the idea of a very
    small MIB for the simplest UPS, again requesting multiple MIBs.  The chair
    pointed out that SNMPv2 compliance groups are the answer, and were
    motivated by exactly such problems.  In the interest of moving faster,
    individuals volunteered to be spokesmen to push progress for each of the
    MIB groups.

Frame Relay Network MIB BOF (FRNETMIB)

    The Frame Relay Network MIB BOF met to discuss whether there was interest
    in a standard set of objects for FR CNM.  Work in this area started in the
    Frame Relay Forum and is continuing there.  There was consensus that a
    working group should be formed to align with this work and to ultimately
    produce a MIB in this area.

IFIP Electronic Mail Management BOF (EMAILMGT)

    The EMailMgt BOF met in 3 sessions with a cumulative participation of 32
    people.  Two documents (Requirements & Model) were reviewed and revised to
    align terminology and concepts.  Work between now and the next meeting in
    June will be done via EMail in the EMailMgt mailing list.  The next
    face-to-face meetings are planned for NIST OIW in June (7-11) and
    Amsterdam IETF in July (12-16).  Our objective is to complete and publish
    our Requirements and Model documents (as Informational RFCs) by the end of
    the July IETF meeting.  Work will then refocus on support of coordinated
    development of appropriate MO/MIB specifications.  In the interim, we will
    coordinate MO/MIB development efforts with cross-participation in the
    involved working groups.

Mail and Directory Management BOF (MADMAN)

    The issue of a charter was discussed.  Four documents were suggested for
    development: (1) a network application MIB model, (2) a MIB module for
    MTAs, (3) A MIB module DSAs, and possibly, (4) a MIB module for message
    stores.  Draft documents describing the first three MIBs were available
    (although two of them showed up "just in time"); these documents were
    reviewed and minor changes were made. Finally there was a long discussion
    concerning what might go into a Message Store MIB module.

Managing ATM with SNMP BOF (ATMMIB)

    An IETF BOF was held on 4/1/93 to discuss the need to standardize managed
    objects for ATM management.  This BOF also discussed the need to
    standardize managed objects for SONET equipment. The BOF was chaired by
    Kaj Tesink (Bellcore), and featured presentations by Masuma Ahmed
    (Bellcore) on a strawman ATM MIB, Keith McCloghrie (Hughes LAN Systems) on
    the ILMI of the ATM Forum, and Kaj Tesink on the Internet-Draft for a
    SONET MIB. The BOF recommended unanimously to form a WG (the AToMMIB WG)
    that is chartered to produces MIBs on these topics.

Modem Management BOF (MODEMMGT)

    The Modem Management BOF discussed monitoring and control issues for modem
    devices and also examine what currently defined MIB modules could be used
    in support of this.  There was also discussion of alignment with other
    organizations.  There was consensus that a working group be chartered to
    complete this work.

SNA Systems Management BOF (SNAMIB)

    The three SNAMIB BOF sessions were well attended.  The primary objective
    was to assess the community interest in developing standard MIBs for SNMP
    management of SNA systems, protocols and data links.  Strong interest was
    expressed by all the attendees; in addition, thirteen parties came
    forward with resource commitments for the work needed.  Hence, it was
    decided that we should go ahead and have working groups formed.
    Attention was then focused on identifying the SNA systems, protocols and
    data links that should be worked on at this time.  The considerations
    that were applied to this discussion included resource availability,
    establishing a track record (with IETF) by taking on (and succeeding in)
    manageable amount of work and priority of the system/device/data links in
    question.  The group then identified two prospective working groups, one
    to focus on the two most important SNA NAU services protocols and the
    other to focus on the two most important SNA data links.  Editors and
    Chairs were identified for the two working groups.  Finally, as an
    initial milestone, dates were set for vendors to contribute their MIBs.