2.4.1 ADSL MIB (adslmib)

NOTE: This charter is a snapshot of the 50th IETF Meeting in Minneapolis, Minnesota. It may now be out-of-date. Last Modified: 14-Mar-01


Michael Sneed <mike.sneed@go.ecitele.com>
David Allen <dallan@nortel.ca>

Operations and Management Area Director(s):

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
Bert Wijnen <bwijnen@lucent.com>

Operations and Management Area Advisor:

Bert Wijnen <bwijnen@lucent.com>

Technical Advisor(s):

Kaj Tesink <kaj@research.telcordia.com>


Faye Ly <faye@salira.com>
Greg Bathrick <greg.bathrick@nokia.com>

Mailing Lists:

In Body: subscribe/signoff XDSLMIB
Archive: index XDSLMIB/get <archivename>

Description of Working Group:

The working group will define a set of managed objects to be used for management of Very high speed Digital Subscriber Line (VDSL) services as defined by T1E1.4/2000-009R2. It is a goal, though not a requirement, that the resultant MIB be published as an extension to the ADSLMIB. The MIB defined by this group will be generated using SMIv2, will be consistent with the SNMP management framework, and will describe the relationship of the objects defined to existing MIBs such as those described by the current ADSLMIB and HDSL2/SHDSL MIB, the interfaces MIB, and the AToM MIB.

The working group will consider the input of the DSL forum and the ITU in the definition of this MIB.
In addition, the group will continue to work on the promotion of the ADSLMIB, the ADSL Extension MIB, and the HDSL2/SHDSL MIB through the IETF standards process.

Goals and Milestones:



Submit Internet-Draft to cover subscriber equipment



Meet at Chicago IETF to review Internet-Drafts



Submit Internet-Draft to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard.



Meet at Oslo IETF to review new Internet-Drafts and discuss implementation experience on initial MIB



Submit supplementary Internet-Draft to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard.



Produce Internet-Draft covering HDSL2 management objects.



Submit updated HDSL2/SHDSL Internet-Draft



Complete WG last call for HDSL2/SHDSL management objects



Collect implementation reports for ADSL MIB



Submit HDSL2/SHDSL MIB to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard

Mar 01


Submit initial Internet-Draft VDSL MIB

Apr 01


Submit Internet-Draft ADSL MIB based on implementations of RFC2662

May 01


Submit ADSL MIB to IESG for consideration as Draft Standard

Jun 01


Submit updated VDSL MIB Internet-Draft

Aug 01


Complete WG last call on VDSL MIB

Aug 01


Submit VDSL MIB to IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard

Request For Comments:






Definitions of Managed Objects for the ADSL Lines

Current Meeting Report

Mike Sneed, Dave Allan Chairs
Minutes taken by Dave Allan
Agenda Bashing

Document Status
Good reports on RFC 2662 implementation experience. Will consolidate this and put it on the mailing list.

Some problems with the extensions MIB. To be floated on the mailing list. Why shouldn't we make the extension tables into augments to RFC 2662. Need a 1:1 mapping of tables in order to succeed. (which is the case). Current intent is to move it back to "augments".

SHDSL MIB did last call last month. Some IESG editorial feedback. Some objects to be changed, and some tables to be renumbered.
Note we had a charter change to do VDSL.

DSLF Liaison
No DSLF liaison this time. Expect to have input on VDSL for the London IETF.

VDSL MIB - Bob Ray
We've been promised some objects from the DSLF. Which have not been forthcoming.

History - initial email engagement got response from Australia providing information that Bob Mib-I-fied.
Problem include that the EOC register set is not defined only that they exist. This means two options,
- Hayes modem type command set
- define a MIB that can map to a generic register set.
The NEC australia guys started with the ADSL MIB, and defined DMT extensions.

Discussion: Augments not a good idea in this scenario.

Ways forward:
Two ways to go, make generic and cover DMT/SCM, or create a profile table for each approach.

What we have is a DMT specific MIB, and we either need to fix this or trash it and start again.

What would be useful is a redraft of the relevant objects in the context of VDSL.

Is there a timetable for expecting an EOC register definition. FS-VDSL is planning interoperability in September so something has to exist.

Dave to e-mail FS-VDSL members to see if such a defn exists. Others to offer some awarness of work effort schedules in the other groups. (Vijay Dinar)

Wrap up:
Call for more implementation experience.