NOTE: This charter is a snapshot of the 39th IETF Meeting in Munich, Bavaria, Germany. It may now be out-of-date.
Chair(s):
Robert Moore <remoore@ralvm6.vnet.ibm.com>
Routing Area Director(s):
Joel Halpern <jhalpern@newbridge.com>
Routing Area Advisor:
Joel Halpern <jhalpern@newbridge.com>
Mailing Lists:
General Discussion: snanaumib@external.cisco.com
To Subscribe: snanaumib-request@cisco.com
Archive: ftp://ftp.cisco.com/snanaumib/mail-archive
Description of Working Group:
The SNA NAU MIB Working Group is chartered to define a set of managed objects for SNA Network Accessible Units. These objects will provide the ability to monitor and control those devices, providing fault, configuration, and performance management, and will be consistent with the SNMP framework and existing SNMP standards. The working group has completed MIBs for base SNA NAU functions, for LU Type 6.2 or APPC (Advanced Program-to-Program Communication), and for APPN (Advanced Peer-to-Peer Networking). MIBs for Dependent LU Requester (DLUR) and for HPR (High Performance Routing) are nearing completion. The working group is currently working on a MIB for APPN Extended Border Node (EBN). The working group will make sure that its work is aligned with the SNA DLC MIB Working Group, due to the close relationship between the devices being worked on by the two groups.
Goals and Milestones:
Done |
|
Begin discussion of proprietary MIBS and develop a single proposal. |
Done |
|
Post an Internet-Draft of the SNA NAU Services MIB. |
Done |
|
Submit the SNA NAU Services MIB to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard. |
Done |
|
Post proprietary MIB modules. |
Done |
|
Develop and post a single proposal for structure of the MIB module. |
Done |
|
Meet at IETF to review proposed structure/walk through. |
Done |
|
Post Internet-Draft of the APPC MIB. |
Done |
|
Post second Internet-Draft of APPC MIB. |
Done |
|
Meet at IETF to review MIB (if necessary). |
Done |
|
Achieve consensus on the final Internet-Draft. |
Done |
|
Post Internet-Draft of the APPN MIB. |
Done |
|
Submit revised APPN MIB to as an Internet-Draft. |
Done |
|
Submit the APPC MIB Internet-Draft to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard. |
Done |
|
Achieve consensus on the new SNA NAU MIB Internet-Draft. |
Done |
|
Post Internet-Draft of HPR MIB. |
Done |
|
Submit the SNA NAU MIB Internet-Draft to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard. |
Done |
|
Submit revised HPR MIB as an Internet-Draft. |
Done |
|
Submit HPR MIB Internet-Draft to IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard. |
Done |
|
Submit DLUR MIB to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard. |
Aug 97 |
|
Post Internet-Draft of EBN MIB. |
Oct 97 |
|
Submit revised EBN MIB Internet-Draft. |
Dec 97 |
|
Submit APPN MIB to IESG for consideration as a Draft Standard. |
Dec 97 |
|
Submit APPC MIB to the IESG for consideration as a Draft Standard. |
Dec 97 |
|
Submit EBN MIB to IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard. |
Internet-Drafts:
· Definitions of Managed Objects for HPR
· Definitions of Managed Objects for DLUR
· Definitions of Managed Objects for Extended Border Node
Request For Comments:
RFC |
Status |
Title |
RFC1665 |
PS |
Definitions of Managed Objects for SNA NAUs using SMIv2 |
RFC1666 |
PS |
Definitions of Managed Objects for SNA NAUs using SMIv2 |
RFC2051 |
PS |
Definitions of Managed Objects for APPC |
RFC2155 |
PS |
Definitions of Managed Objects for APPN using SMIv2 |
SNANAU Interim Meeting
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. Bob Moore presented the Branch Extender MIB. 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 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 implementation, 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.
None Received
Roster Not Received