Network Management Area

Director(s):


   o Marshall Rose:  mrose.iesg@dbc.mtview.ca.us


Area Summary reported by Marshall Rose/Dover Beach Consulting


IFIP Electronic Mail Management BOF (EMAILMGT)

Harald Alvestrand presented his document defining an e-mail management
model.  There is an obvious need for a common language to be used
between negotiating parties, e.g., Internet mail manager or GO-MHS
managers who talk to PTTs or commercial partners.  It is also necessary
to have management tools for monitoring, controlling, and planning
changes in a Mail Responsibility area.  By having a precise model,
relationships between the MTA manager, user and e-mail system customer
will be more clear.  Harald will finalize his paper by adding functions
that need monitoring and control, as well as examples for the
sendmail-based systems and circulate his next version of the document in
the IFIP-EMAILMGT distribution list.  After comments from the list
members the document will be submitted as an RFC for the Houston
meeting.


ATM MIB Working Group (ATOMMIB)

The ATOMMIB Working Group met to discuss the status of the work on ATM
and SONET MIBs.  The ATM work took up most of the meeting time.
Compatibility with the ILMI MIB of the ATM Forum was an important issue.
In addition, the working group did a detailed review of the proposed ATM
MIB. As a result, a new version will be posted as an Internet-Draft.
Some issues were deferred to the mailing list.  The SONET MIB work is
rather mature.  Some minor changes were agreed to.  One issue was
deferred to the mailing list.  A new version will be posted.


Frame Relay Service MIB Working Group (FRNETMIB)

The FRNETMIB Working group met twice at the 27th IETF. Items discussed
were Kenneth Rodemann's SMA draft (which received general support),
Kenneth's proposed VC-Table contained in the SMA draft (which, after
being converted to a ``flow'' table received general support) and the
current draft of the MIB (which received general support and a variety
of changes).  The FRNETMIB Working Group will continue work on both the
FRS MIB and the SMA document with the goal of completing both by the
December 1993 date of the original charter.  The ``flow'' table work
will be moved to the IFMIB Working Group.  A revised draft of the FRS

                                   1





MIB (in SNMPv2 format) will be posted to the Internet-Draft directory
prior to INTEROP in August.


Interfaces MIB Working Group (IFMIB)

The IFMIB Working Group met twice.  The interfaces evolution draft was
discussed in detail.  Issues in the June 1 version were considered
first---none were contentious.


  1. Consideration was given to replacing certain objects in the old
     interfaces group:  ifOutQlen, ifType and ifSpecific.  Proposals
     will be made to the mailing list.

  2. 64-bit counters were discussed.  It was resolved that only packet
     and octet counters would be 64 bits, and the conformance groups
     were changed.

  3. The RFC 1229 additions were discussed.  Some objects were deleted,
     some were not.  Retained were ifPromiscuous, a modified
     ifTestTable, and the ifRcvTable.


Modem Management Working Group (MODEMMGT)

The meeting was attended by some 20 individuals representing SNMP
network management vendors, modem manufacturers, the IETF Network
Management Area Directorate, and a few users.  We spent the bulk of the
time discussing 5 significant architectural issues.

Good progress was made in resolving these points.  We are hoping the
group can produce an Internet-Draft near the end of July.  The long-term
goal of the group is to agree on the details of a written draft by the
end of the year.


SNA NAU Services MIB Working Group (SNANAU)

The group reviewed the issues related to the current draft of the SNANAU
MIB. Following is the list of specific results:


   o A number of decisions have been reached concerning modifications of
     the MIB draft in preparation to release it as an Internet-Draft.

   o There are some points which have to be discussed and agreed upon
     with the SNADLC Working Group.  They will be contacted via e-mail
     after the IETF.


                                   2





   o Dave Perkins has been asked to clarify two problems related to
     SNMPv1-v2 migration (row creation) and the use of the new ``if''
     group.

   o We decided to suggest a supplemental working group meeting during
     one of the popular SNA implementors workshops (sometime in
     September).  The idea is to provide another opportunity for people
     who already declared their interest or who are potentially
     interested in this effort to review the MIB draft and become
     involved in further work.


Token Ring Remote Monitoring Working Group (TRMON)

A final call was made for comments on the TRMON document.  The comments
received were incorporated into the next draft, which is available as an
Internet-Draft.  This document was also forwarded to the Network
Management Area Director with a recommendation that it become the TRMON
Proposed Standard.  The Network Management Area Directorate (NMDIR) has
started looking at the document and one of their action items is to
ensure that there are no conflicts with the Token Ring MIB. Once NMDIR
is satisfied with the document, it will be forward to the IESG.

The IEEE 802.5 committee is working on a new draft.  Draft four should
be available in September of 1993, with a conclusion of the process
scheduled for March of 1994.

Once TRMON is released as a proposed standard, the TRMON Working Group
will be disbanded and the RMON Working Group reformed for consideration
of RFC 1271 advancement.  A strawman charter was presented.  It was
decided that the date for working group recommendation should be March
of 1994.



                                   3