2.3.3 Frame Relay Service MIB (frnetmib)

NOTE: This charter is a snapshot of the 45th IETF Meeting in Oslo, Norway. It may now be out-of-date. Last Modified: 27-May-99

Chair(s):

Andy Malis <malis@ascend.com>

Internet Area Director(s):

Thomas Narten <narten@raleigh.ibm.com>
Erik Nordmark <nordmark@eng.sun.com>

Internet Area Advisor:

Erik Nordmark <nordmark@eng.sun.com>

Technical Advisor(s):

Bob Stewart <bstewart@cisco.com>

Mailing Lists:

General Discussion:frnetmib@sunroof.eng.sun.com
To Subscribe: majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com
In Body: subscribe frnetmib
Archive: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/frnetmib/

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:

Done

  

Post the initial Internet-Draft for discussion.

Done

  

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.

Internet-Drafts:

Request For Comments:

RFC

Status

Title

 

RFC1604

PS

Definitions of Managed Objects for Frame Relay Service

Current Meeting Report

Frame Relay Service MIB (frnetmib) Working Group Minutes IETF-45, Oslo

Date: Tuesday, July 13, 1700 - 1800

Chair: Andrew Malis, Lucent Technologies, amalis@lucent.com

Minutes recorded by Andrew Malis

Mailing List Information:
Discussion: frnetmib@sunroof.eng.sun.com
EMail Archive: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/frnetmib/
(un)subscribe requests to: majordomo@sunroof.eng.sun.com

Agenda:

1. Administrivia, current documents status

2. Ken Rehbehn and Orly Nicklass, draft-ietf-frnetmib-atmiwf-02.txt, Definitions of Managed Objects for Monitoring and Controlling the Frame Relay/ATM PVC Service Interworking Function

3. Rob Steinberger and Orly Nicklass, draft-steinberger-frmrelay-service-00.txt, Definitions of Managed Objects for Frame Relay Service Level Definitions

4. Open discussion

Agenda Item 1: Administrivia, current document status

Andy presented the agenda. There were no request for changes or additional agenda items.

Following the review of the agenda, Andy presented on overview of the status of work in the frnetmib group.

The following drafts are in progress:

- draft-ietf-frnetmib-frs-mib-06.txt, Definitions of Managed Objects for Frame Relay Service, Ken Rehbehn, Dave Fowler

This draft is in IESG review following WG last call, and has already been revised based on IESG comments. It will need another small change to support the FR/ATM IWF MIB. This was discussed later in the meeting.

- draft-ietf-frnetmib-spvc-02.txt, Frame Relay Switched PVC MIB, Bill Coutts

This was forwarded to IESG for publication as Proposed Standard RFC, and comments were returned from the IESG. Bill has been busy, but plans to update the draft based upon the comments.

- draft-ietf-frnetmib-atmiwf-02.txt, Definitions of Managed Objects for Monitoring and Controlling the Frame Relay/ATM PVC Service Interworking, Ken Rehbehn, Orly Nicklass, George Mouradian

We heard about this draft later in the meeting.

- Rob Steinberger and Orly Nicklass, draft-steinberger-frmrelay-service-00.txt, Definitions of Managed Objects for Frame Relay Service Level Definitions

We heard about this draft later in the meeting.

- draft-ietf-frnetmib-dte-svc-00.txt, Don Cochrane

- draft-ietf-frnetmib-dcp-02.txt, Moji Kashef, Jaime Colom

Andy has been in contact with the authors, and they have expressed interest in reviving these drafts.

Andy also presented proposed updates to the WG's charter, goals, and milestones, since the current charter and milestones are very out of date. They were accepted by the group, and will be sent out by Andy to the frnetmib email list in a separate message.

Agenda Item 2: Ken Rehbehn and Orly Nicklass, draft-ietf-frnetmib-atmiwf-02.txt, Definitions of Managed Objects for Monitoring and Controlling the Frame Relay/ATM PVC Service Interworking Function

Ken discussed the outstanding issues from the last meeting and the changes since then.

There was only one remaining outstanding issue from the last meeting that Ken still plans to add to the MIB, ATM fault code and location objects.

Outstanding issues to be resolved:

- Polish descriptive text
- Alter MIB name to reflect experimental status
- Prepare draft for technical advisor review
- Address cross connection model changes for ATM MIB and FRS MIB

Ken reviewed the cross-connection model, and discussed possible changes to the ATM and FRS MIB to accommodate the IWF MIB. He presented two options for changes to the ATM and FRS MIB models (these had already been presented on the email list as well). The WG reached consensus on Ken's first proposed model. Andy will take the action of discussing the AtoM MIB changes with the chair of the AtoM MIB WG and the Internet and Management Area Directors. The group also agreed upon a similar change to the Frame Relay Service MIB.

Agenda Item 3: Rob Steinberger and Orly Nicklass, draft-steinberger-frmrelay-service-00.txt, Definitions of Managed Objects for Frame Relay Service Level Definitions

Rob presented an overview of the SLD MIB, which is based on FRF.13 from the Frame Relay Forum (Frame Relay Service Level Definitions), and uses the model and reference points defined in that document.

Ken noted that there is a somewhat similar MIB, draft-white-slapm-mib-04.txt. He suggested that we study it and decide whether we should be doing something on our own, or should do work in conjunction with that MIB. We noted that it was an individual submission, and it was unclear to us which (if any) WG is considering or working on it. Opportunities for synergy will be investigated.

Rob and Orly will continue work on the MIB. Comments to the list are invited.

Agenda Item 4: Open Discussion

No additional items were brought up, and the group adjourned.

Slides

Agenda
Outstanding Issues
Level Definitions