Minutes of Joint SNANAU WG / APPN MIBS SIG Meeting at AIW 14

"R.E. (Robert) Moore (254-4436)" <REMOORE@ralvm6.vnet.ibm.com> Tue, 29 July 1997 15:36 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa11141; 29 Jul 97 11:36 EDT
Received: from beasley.cisco.com (mailgate-sj-2.cisco.com [171.69.2.135]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid LAA21044 for <ietf-archive@cnri.reston.va.us>; Tue, 29 Jul 1997 11:35:10 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from VNET.IBM.COM (vnet.ibm.com [204.146.168.194]) by beasley.cisco.com (8.8.4-Cisco.1/CISCO.GATE.1.1) with SMTP id IAA22420 for <snanaumib@external.cisco.com>; Tue, 29 Jul 1997 08:28:21 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <199707291528.IAA22420@beasley.cisco.com>
Received: from RALVM6 by VNET.IBM.COM (IBM VM SMTP V2R3) with BSMTP id 5991; Tue, 29 Jul 97 11:28:17 EDT
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 11:26:48 -0400
From: "R.E. (Robert) Moore (254-4436)" <REMOORE@ralvm6.vnet.ibm.com>
To: aiw-appn-mibs@raleigh.ibm.com, snanaumib@external.cisco.com
Subject: Minutes of Joint SNANAU WG / APPN MIBS SIG Meeting at AIW 14

The IETF SNA NAU Services MIB (snanau) WG and the AIW APPN MIBs SIG held
a joint meeting on July 17 at AIW 14 in San Jose, California, with Bob
Moore serving as chair.  The following topics were discussed:

1. Following the Border Node decision to request CP approval for the EBN
   Architecture Reference at the AIW closing plenary, the MIBs SIG agreed
   to make a similar request for the EBN MIB.  Both the Architecture and
   the MIB were granted CP status by the AIW.  There are still a few open
   questions on the EBN Architecture, which will be handled as architecture
   maintenance items.  These may result in minor changes or extensions to
   the EBN MIB, but at this point the SIG feels that the MIB is sufficiently
   stable to be issued by the WG as an Internet-Draft.

2. The Branch Extender MIB was presented by Bob Moore.  This MIB is a
   part of the overall Branch Extender architecture that IBM contributed
   to the AIW.  The MIB contains only four accessible objects, which
   extend four tables in the APPN MIB (RFC 2155).  Rather than
   maintaining a separate MIB module, Bob recommended that the four
   objects be incorporated into the APPN MIB, under the heading of
   "implementation experience."  (A similar set of MLTG objects approved
   by the SIG at AIW 13 have already followed this path.)  Bob agreed to
   distribute an updated APPN MIB module with the Branch Extender
   objects added to it.

3. Bob reported that the DLUR and HPR MIBs are currently in the queue for
   IESG review for promotion to Proposed Standard.

4. There was an extensive discussion of implementation experience as an
   IETF requirement for advancement to Draft Standard status.  Currently
   the WG has two MIBs at the Proposed Standard level (APPC - RFC2051 and
   APPN - RFC 2155), and two more waiting to get there (DLUR and HPR).
   The WG's initial focus will be on collecting and documenting
   implementation experience for the APPN MIB, since it is the foundation
   for the DLUR and HPR MIBs, and since we know that there are at least
   two independent agent-side implementations (IBM and Cisco), and at
   least two management applications (again, IBM and Cisco).  The WG
   enumerated a number of items we want to document in our implementation
   experience for the APPN MIB:

      - extensions to match APPN architecture extensions (MLTG, Branch
        Extender)
      - unimplemented objects
      - objects with hard-coded, non-standard, or otherwise "exceptional"
        values
      - where the MIB leaves room for implementation choices, the choices
        that were actually made
      - relationships between MIB implementations and other network
        management elements (e.g., the APPN Node Operator Facility)

   Bob agreed to post to the mailing list a first draft of the IBM agent's
   implementation experiences for the APPN MIB, as well as a draft of a
   template for documenting MIB implementation experience.  Vivian Tseng
   agreed to assemble a draft of the Cisco agent's implementation
   experiences for the APPN MIB.

   One question raised in the meeting is whether there are two
   independent agent implementations of the APPC MIB.  Bob indicated that
   IBM has one, but none of the other representatives present were aware of
   implementations in their companies.  If anyone on the mailing list is
   aware of another APPC MIB implmentation, they should report on it.

   As usual, the SIG and WG plan to hold their next joint meeting at the
   next AIW:  AIW 15 will be held November 3 - 6, in Raleigh, NC.

Attendees:

    Mike Cambria         mcambria@lucent.com       Lucent Technologies
    Gary Dudley          gdudley@vnet.ibm.com      IBM
    Victor Freyer        vfreyer@cisco.com         Cisco Systems
    Doyle Horne          dhorne@vnet.ibm.com       IBM
    Fran Hunt            fhunt@baynetworks.com     Bay Networks
    Pad Jakkahalli       pad@cisco.com             Cisco Systems
    Vishwa Maravanthe    vishwa@cisco.com          Cisco Systems
    Chuck Minchew        cminchew@us.ibm.com       IBM
    Prasad Miriyala      miriyala@cisco.com        Cisco Systems
    Bob Moore            remoore@us.ibm.com        IBM
    Tim Stotelmeyer      timst@atm.com             Attachmate
    Ed Tremblay          edtremblay@vnet.ibm.com   IBM
    Vivian Tseng         vtseng@cisco.com          Cisco Systems
    Peter J. Williams    wna@compuserve.com        WNA Ltd.
    Doug Wolff           dougw@3com.com            3Com

Bob Moore, IBM Networking Software