NM "State of the Area" Report
Marshall Rose <firstname.lastname@example.org> Fri, 16 April 1993 03:18 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa22592;
15 Apr 93 23:18 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa22586; 15 Apr 93 23:18 EDT
Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13739; 15 Apr 93 23:18 EDT
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa22579; 15 Apr 93 23:18 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa22573; 15 Apr 93 23:18 EDT
Received: from ppp.dbc.mtview.ca.us by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa13734; 15 Apr 93 23:18 EDT
Received: from localhost by dbc.mtview.ca.us (5.65/3.1.090690) id AA17884; Thu, 15 Apr 93 20:16:24 -0700
Subject: NM "State of the Area" Report
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----- =_aaaaaaaaaa0"
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 20:16:22 -0700
From: Marshall Rose <email@example.com>
Greetings. As a result of the IAB/IESG nomination/confirmation process established by the POISED working group, I now find myself in the role of "Area Director for Network Management" on the IESG. The NM area has lacked an AD for approximately two months. Things have been piling up. I am posting the following status report for two reasons: - to inform the community as to where I think things stand; and, - to find out if I've missed something Please reply to me directly. /mtr
Getting to know the new NM AD ----------------------------- I am Principal of a consultancy corporation: 50% of my time is devoted to clients, 50% to community service. The clients neither fund nor direct any community service. The corporation supports my participation on the IESG solely as a matter of community service. For over a year now, I have been publishing a bi-monthly newsletter on SNMP (with the help of several hard-working contributors). This activity, The Simple Times, will continue. However, The Simple Times will remain independent of my role as NM AD. I will continue to use the appropriate IETF mailing lists in my role as NM AD. I will also use the SNMP mailing list for periodic updates on the NM area. There are many demands on my community service time. By taking the role of NM AD, these other activities are going to suffer, e.g., I probably won't be answering "random" questions on mailing lists.
The NM Area Directorate ----------------------- The NM area has a Directorate. The role of the NM-Directorate is three-fold: - to consider strategic evolution of the SNMP framework; - to provide architectural and engineering guidance to working groups which develop MIB modules, at the earliest possible stages; and, - to help the NM AD in reviewing submitted I-Ds. The current NM-Directorate membership is: Fred Baker, Ted Brunner, Jeff Case, Keith McCloghrie, Dave Perkins, Bob Stewart, and Steve Waldbusser The NM-Directorate is an advisory entity and has no standards-setting powers. The meetings of the NM-Directorate are closed. The members of the NM-Directorate are appointed by the NM AD. For the first role, strategic evolution, the NM-Directorate considers "what needs to be done next". Of course, strategic issues may also be pursued in BOF's at IETF meetings, independently of the NM-Directorate. Alternately, you can send a message to me and I will forward it to the NM-Directorate. For the second role, whenever a WG will be developing a MIB module as a part of their chartered activities, a member of the NM-Directorate will be asked to participate in that WG, to provide expert consultation with respect to SNMP, MIB module design, and standards development. This assignment will be a matter of record in the charter. Finally, for the third role, once a MIB module is completed by a WG, the IESG asks the NM-Directorate to review the document. My hope is that this will be a pro-forma review--after all, a member of the NM-Directorate should have been assigned to help the WG during their development effort. The directorate is currently evaluating several I-Ds, prior to submission to the IESG for standards evaluation: draft-ietf-bridge-objects-01.txt draft-ietf-dns-mibext-05.txt draft-ietf-pppext-bridgemib-01.txt draft-ietf-pppext-ipcpmib-01.txt draft-ietf-pppext-lcpmib-01.txt draft-ietf-pppext-secmib-01.txt draft-ietf-x25mib-ipox25mib-04.txt With the exception of the DNS MIB, which is much larger than the others, I hope to have all of these before the IESG by month's end.
SNMPv2 and MIB modules ---------------------- This topic is being discussed by the NM-Directorate. Until such time as a resolution is reached, here is the interim policy. From now until August 2, 1993: Any MIB module submitted by a WG must use the SNMPv1 SMI (RFCs 1155 and 1212), taking special care to minimize the transformation necessary to use the SNMPv2 SMI. From August 2, 1993 until the SNMPv2 SMI is a draft Internet-standard: All new MIB modules submitted by a WG for standardization must use the SNMPv2 SMI. However, the following SNMPv2 syntaxes may not be used: BIT STRING, Counter64, or UInteger32 (either directly or through a textual convention). Further, any existing MIB modules updated by a WG must be evaluated and possibly changed to minimize the transformation necessary to use the SNMPv2 SMI. Once the SNMPv2 SMI is a draft Internet-standard: All new MIB modules submitted by a WG for standardization must use the SNMPv2 SMI, and are allowed to use any SNMPv2 syntax. Further, any MIB existing modules on the standards-track which use the SNMPv1 SMI will be modified to use the SNMPv2 SMI, making the smallest possible set of changes. In most cases, this means that only the IMPORTS statement of the MIB module will change. In addition, from August 2, 1993 onward: Whenever a WG works on a MIB module (either developing it or advancing it along the standards-track), that WG will be responsible for producing a conformance statement, in a separate document, for that MIB.
Working Groups -------------- A working group is either active or inactive. Active working groups have charters to develop documents. Inactive working groups have no charter -- typically because they have completed their previous charter. These inactive working groups (and their mailing lists) serve as a forum for implementors. When a standards-track document produced by a working group is ready for further evaluation or new documents are appropriate, the working group is re-chartered accordingly. AToM MIB (atommib) Chair(s): Kaj Tesink <firstname.lastname@example.org> Consultant:Keith McCloghrie <email@example.com> WG mail: firstname.lastname@example.org To Join: email@example.com Active: beginning This working group is now chartered. Bridge MIB (bridge) Chair(s): Fred Baker <firstname.lastname@example.org> WG mail: email@example.com To Join: firstname.lastname@example.org Active: submitted draft-ietf-bridge-objects-01.txt for draft standard The working group is developing a Source Routing MIB. Character MIB (charmib) Chair(s): Bob Stewart <email@example.com> WG mail: firstname.lastname@example.org To Join: email@example.com Active: Re-activated Re-activated to evaluate RFCs 1316-1318 with respect to the standards track. Chassis MIB (chassis) Chair(s): Bob Stewart <firstname.lastname@example.org> Jeffrey Case <email@example.com> WG mail: firstname.lastname@example.org To Join: email@example.com Active: editing draft-ietf-chassis-mib-00.txt The working group met in Columbus and is developing the next version of the draft. DECnet Phase IV MIB (decnetiv) Chair(s): Jon Saperia <firstname.lastname@example.org> WG mail: email@example.com To Join: firstname.lastname@example.org Active: Re-activated Re-activated to evaluate RFC 1289 with respect to the standards track. FDDI MIB (fddimib) Chair(s): Jeffrey Case <email@example.com> WG mail: firstname.lastname@example.org To Join: email@example.com Active: editing draft-ietf-fddimib-objects-01.txt The working group met in Columbus and is developing the next version of the draft. Host Resources MIB (hostmib) Chair(s): Steven Waldbusser <firstname.lastname@example.org> WG mail: email@example.com To Join: firstname.lastname@example.org Done: final I-D in preparation Consensus reached in the working group, but draft not yet submitted. IEEE 802.3 Hub MIB (hubmib) Chair(s): Keith McCloghrie <email@example.com> Donna McMaster <firstname.lastname@example.org> WG mail: email@example.com To Join: firstname.lastname@example.org Active: editing draft-ietf-hubmib-mau-01.txt The working group met in Columbus and is developing the next version of the draft. In addition, RFC 1368 is now eligible for further evaluation for the standards track. Once the WG finishes the MAU MIB, I'll draft a revision to its charter so that it can work on evaluating RFC 1368 for standards track advancement. Modem Management (modemmgt) Chair(s): Mark S. Lewis <Mark.S.Lewis@Telebit.COM> Consultant:Steven Waldbusser <email@example.com> WG mail: modemmgt@Telebit.com To Join: majordomo@Telebit.com Active: beginning This working group is now chartered. Remote Monitoring (rmonmib) Chair(s): Michael Erlinger <firstname.lastname@example.org> WG mail: email@example.com To Join: firstname.lastname@example.org Inactive: awaiting the next stage for RFC 1271 (proposed standard) The working group is eligible to re-activate now, a charter is being prepared. SNMP Version 2 (snmpv2) Chair(s): Bob Stewart <email@example.com> WG mail: firstname.lastname@example.org To Join: email@example.com Inactive: awaiting the next stage for SNMPv2 RFCs (proposed standard) The I-Ds produced by this WG and the SNMP Security WG were approved by the IESG as proposed standards and are in the process of RFC publication. Because of coordination problems, the SNMPv2 WG will be given responsibility for all the I-Ds, and the SNMP Security WG will be disbanded. Due to demands on my time, I will be unable to continue as editor for these documents. As such, Keith McCloghrie is designated as editor. The working group should re-activate in September. Prior to this, Keith is actioned to prepare re-writes of the ADMIN and SEC documents, to improve readability, but not change technical content. Token Ring Remote Monitoring (trmon) Chair(s): Michael Erlinger <firstname.lastname@example.org> WG mail: email@example.com To Join: firstname.lastname@example.org Active: editing The working group met in Columbus and is developing the next version of the draft. Trunk MIB (trunkmib) Chair(s): Fred Baker <email@example.com> Tracy Cox <firstname.lastname@example.org> WG mail: email@example.com To Join: firstname.lastname@example.org Inactive: awaiting the next stage for RFCs 1406, 1407 (proposed standard) The working group should re-activate in June. Uninterruptible Power Supply (upsmib) Chair(s): Jeff Case <email@example.com> WG mail: firstname.lastname@example.org To Join: email@example.com Active: editing The working group met in Columbus and is developing the next version of the draft. X.25 Management Information Base (x25mib) Chair(s): Dean Throop <firstname.lastname@example.org> WG mail: email@example.com To Join: firstname.lastname@example.org Done: submitted draft-ietf-x25mib-ipox25mib-04.txt for proposed standard In May, RFCs 1381, 1382 will be available for further evaluation for the standards track.
Other things awaiting work -------------------------- Six NM-related BOFs met in Columbus. Five of the six concluded with consensus that a WG should be formed: ATM MIB (atommib) Frame Relay Service MIB (frnetmib) Mail and Directory Management (madman) Modem Management (modemmgt) SNA MIB (snamib) Two of these have already been chartered (atommib and modemmgt). I am in the process of preparing charters for the other three. I hope to have the resulting charters approved by the IESG by month's end. The sixth BOF is E-Mail Management (emailmgt) which is really an IFIP working group (WG6.5) that happens to meet when the IETF meetings, so no further action is needed. The following MIB modules are eligible for further evaluation for the standards track. However, they lack a working group. I will consult with the IESG to charter an "interfaces MIB" working group. RFC 1229 - Extensions to the generic-interface MIB RFC 1231 - IEEE 802.5 Token Ring Interface Type MIB RFC 1304 - SMDS Interface Protocol (SIP) Interface Type MIB I also expect that this WG could deal with evaluating the ether-like MIB (RFC 1398) when it is eligible in July. Here is a list of MIB modules defined by WGs outside of the NM area. This list will be provided to the appropriate AD for action. RFC MIB Module WG Eligible ---- ---------------------------------- ------- -------- 1243 AppleTalk MIB appleip now 1253 OSPF version 2 MIB ospf now 1269 BGP version 3 MIB bgp now 1315 Frame Relay DTE Interface Type MIB iplpdn now 1354 SNMP IP Forwarding Table MIB rreq now 1389 RIPv2 MIB rip2 July 1414 Identification MIB ident August Finally, the work of the multi-protocol SNMP WG will need to be advanced in September. RFC SNMPv1 Mapping WG Eligible ---- ---------------------------------- ------- -------- 1418 SNMP over OSI mpsnmp September 1419 SNMP over AppleTalk mpsnmp September 1420 SNMP over IPX mpsnmp September
- NM "State of the Area" Report Marshall Rose