2.3.6 Frame Relay Service MIB (frnetmib)

This Working Group Did Not Meet

NOTE: This charter is a snapshot of the 39th IETF Meeting in Munich, Bavaria, Germany. It may now be out-of-date.


James Watt <james@newbridge.com>

Internet Area Director(s):

Jeffrey Burgan <burgan@home.net>
Thomas Narten <narten@raleigh.ibm.com>

Internet Area Advisor:

Jeffrey Burgan <burgan@home.net>

Technical Advisor(s):

Fred Baker <fred@cisco.com>

Mailing Lists:

General Discussion: frs-mib@newbridge.com
To Subscribe: frs-mib-request@newbridge.com

Description of Working Group:

The Frame Relay Service MIB Working Group is chartered to define an initial set of managed objects which will be useful for customer network management of a provider's Frame Relay Service. The working group will consider existing definitions, including the Frame Relay Forum's work in this area. The objects defined by the working group will be consistent with the SNMP framework.

The working group will coordinate with both the Frame Relay Forum and the ATM MIB Working Group.

The working group is chartered to complete four tasks:

a) Consider revisions to the existing FRS MIB (currently published as a Proposed Standard in RFC 1604) in light of implementation experience, changes to the interface MIBs (e.g. IF-MIB, DS1-MIB, DS3-MIB, FR-DTE-MIB, creation of the DS0 and DS0 Bundle MIB modules), and evolution of the relevant non-IETF standards,

b) Prepare a Recommendation to the Area Director as to the appropriate disposition of the (updated) FRS MIB, i.e. that it be advanced to Draft Standard status or that it cycle at Proposed Status,

c) Develop a set of managed objects to provide the instrumentation required to manage switched-virtual circuits in a frame-relay environment.

d) Develop a set of managed objects to provide the instrumentation required to manage connections that terminate on a mixture of ATM and Frame Relay interfaces, i.e. interworked connections. These objects will be the minimum necessary to provide the ability to monitor and control interworked connections and shall use existing definitions (e.g. IF-MIB, FRS-MIB, ATM-MIB, etc.) to instrument the interfaces and the "native" parts of the connections.

In all cases, the working group will keep the Frame Relay and ATM Forums informed of its progress and will actively solicit input from those Fora.

All output of the group will be consistent with the existing SNMPv2c framework and standards, including the SNMPv2c Structure of Management Information (SMI).

Goals and Milestones:



Post the initial Internet-Draft for discussion.



Submit the Frame Relay Service MIB to the IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard.

Apr 96


Solicit implementation experience for the IWF and SVC cases and 'requirements' for IWF and SVC cases/

Apr 96


Post summary of SVC requirements, issues, and a basic proposal for the structure of the SVC instrumentation.

May 96


Post first draft of RFC1604 update as an Intenet-Draft.

May 96


Post IWF MIB document and SVC MIB document as Internet-Drafts.

Jun 96


Post revised version of RFC1604 update Internet-Draft.

Jun 96


Meet at Montreal IETF to review RFC1604 update document and develop recommendation on advancement.

Jul 96


Submit final version of RFC1604 Internet-Draft to Area Director, requesting Directorate review.

Jul 96


Post revisions of IWF MIB and SVC MIB as Internet-Drafts.

Sep 96


WG Last Call for IWF MIB and SVC MIB.

Sep 96


Submit IWF MIB and SVC MIB Internet-Drafts to Area Director for referral to Directorate.


Request For Comments:







Definitions of Managed Objects for Frame Relay Service

Previous PageNext Page