• Current Meeting Report
• Slides

Interfaces MIB (ifmib)

NOTE: This charter is a snapshot of that in effect at the time of the 38th IETF Meeting in Memphis, Tennessee. It may now be out-of-date.

Chair(s): 

Ted Brunner <ted.brunner@tek.com>

Internet Area Director(s): 

Frank Kastenholz <kasten@ftp.com>
Jeffrey Burgan <jburgan@baynetworks.com>

Mailing Lists: 

General Discussion:if-mib@thumper.bellcore.com
To Subscribe: if-mib-request@thumper.bellcore.com
Archive: ftp://thumper.bellcore.com/pub/tob/ifmib

Description of Working Group: 

The Interfaces MIB Working Group is chartered to accomplish two tasks. 

First, to develop a collection of managed objects that model the relation between different entities in the data link and physical layers. The working group will explore different modeling approaches in order to develop a collection of objects which is both correct in the modeling sense and has an acceptable impact (if any) on the interfaces table from MIB-II and all media MIB modules on the standards track or under development by a working group. The objects defined by the working group will be consistent with the SNMP framework. 

Second, to prepare a recommendation to the IESG evaluating RFC-1229 (the interface-extensions MIB), RFC-1231 (the token-ring MIB), RFC-1304 (the SMDS MIB), and RFC-1398 (the ethernet-like MIB) with respect to the standards track. 

The recommendation will document implementation, interoperability, and deployment experience. If these experiences suggest that changes should be made to the documents, new drafts may be prepared. 

For RFCs 1229, 1231, and 1304, the recommendation will report one of four outcomes for each RFC:

that the RFC should be advanced from Proposed to Draft Standard status, without changes (if no problems are found); 
that a draft prepared by the working group should replace the RFC, and be designated a Draft Standard (if only minor changes are made); 
that a draft prepared by the working group should replace the RFC, and be designated a Proposed Standard (if major changes or feature enhancements are made); or, 
that the RFC should be designated as Historic (if this technology is problematic). 
For RFC 1398, the recommendation will report one of five outcomes: 
that the RFC should be advanced from Draft Standard to Standard status, without changes (if no problems are found); 
that a draft prepared by the working group should replace the RFC, and be designated a Standard (if only editorial changes are made); 
that a draft prepared by the working group should replace the RFCs, and be designated a Draft Standard (if only minor changes are made); 
that a draft prepared by the working group should replace the RFC, and be designated a Proposed Standard (if major changes or feature enhancements are made); or, 
that the RFC should be designated as Historic (if this technology is problematic).

· The Interfaces Group MIB 

· Definitions of Managed Objects for System and Interface Testing

Request For Comments:

RFC	Status	Title
RFC1573	PS	Evolution of the Interfaces Group of MIB-II
RFC1623	S	Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types
RFC1643	S	Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types
RFC1650	PS	Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface Types using SMIv2
RFC1694	DS	Definitions of Managed Objects for SMDS Interfaces using SMIv2
RFC1743	DS	IEEE 802.5 MIB using SMIv2
RFC1748	DS	IEEE 802.5 MIB using SMIv2
RFC1749	PS	IEEE 802.5 Station Source Routing MIB using SMIv2

Current Meeting Report

Slides