Subject: [Hubmib] Preliminary Minutes of the SLC Joint Meeting of hubmib and atommib

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2002 12:07:58 +0200

Please find attached the preliminary minutes of the SLC joint meeting of
atommib and hubmib. Please send your comments and corrections, before I
submit these. Thanks to Orly and Kam for the diligent note taking work.
Also, presenters are required to send their presentations to
[email-masked], for inclusion in the proceedings.
Regards,
Dan

52 IETF, Salt Lake City
 
Ethernet Interfaces and Hub MIB WG & AToM MIB WG (hubmib & atommib)

TUESDAY, December 11 at 1700-1800
====================================

CHAIRS:	Dan Romascanu <[email-masked]>
		Faye Ly <[email-masked]>
		Nathan Kohn <[email-masked]>

The Ethernet Interfaces and Hub MIB (hubmib) WG and the ATM MIB
(atommib) WG 
held a joint meeting at the 52nd IETF in Salt Lake City. The main
purpose of 
the meeting was to report on the work from the design team formed by
members 
of the two WGs in order to provide recommendations for the WAN Interface

Sublayer (WIS) MIB. Status of the IEEE 802.3ae and the SONET MIB update
were 
also presented. It was noted that the WIS MIB is depended on the SONET
MIB for 
the STS-192c update. Therefore the updated SONET-MIB should be
republished in 
time regardless it is republished with or without advancement.

The participants in the meeting approved the approach presented in the 
Internet-Drafts issued by the Design Team. The participants in the
meeting 
proposed that the design team be transformed into an editor team to
further 
the document. The open issues posted by the design team and the
recommendations 
for resolution from the discussion are listed below. These issues and
proposed 
resolution will be posted to the two WG lists, and to the IEEE 802.3ae
list. 
The Hub MIB WG chair will request a slot for a presentation of the work
and open 
issues at the interim meeting of the IEEE in January 2002, in order to
receive 
more feedback from the IEEE. If now special problems show up, the next
version of 
the Internet-Draft is aimed for WG Last Call.

Summary:

1. Introductions and Agenda Bashing. Three topics were covered;

2. IEEE 802.3 Update / - Dan Romascanu.
Between London  IETF and SLC, there were two meetings of the 802.3ae
group.
Between the two meetings, people response to the documents and draft
3.4c
was out for ballot. Now it is time for Sponsor ballot. According to the
number of iterations the document went through, it looks like it should
be
closed by March time frame, or June the latest.
An interoperability test is expected for Bridge, VLAN, Interface, and
Ether-like MIB.  The result of the tests will provide feedback on
current
documents. This might cause a delay for other document submitting time
including WIS-MIB.

3. Results of AToMMIB's SONET-MIB status discussion /-  Mike Heard
A draft is ready, will be submitted next week. There are only few minor
changes. It is important to get the document published since WIS-MIB
depends
on it. There are no implementation reports of 2558, so if no progress
will
be shown in advancing the documents toward draft standard, it will be
published again as proposed. 
The goal is to get reports by February.

4. Report from the Design Team and Open Issues for WIS MIB /-  KC
Norseth,
Mike Heard
There were three issues to resolve:
-What is the layering model and how should it be mapped to IF-MIB.
-How do we map SNMP objects to GDMO objects of WIS defined in 802.3ae
clause
30.
- How does the solution manage with ETH/RMON free running counters as
well
as 15  
 min interval  SONET counters.

The proposal is to use what exist in ETH, MAU and SONET, as much as
possible.

The WIS MIB can use many of the SONET table.
If Stack table should have the following: LLC, MAC, reconciliation, PHY
coding, Path, Line, Section and 802.3 WAN PMA/PMD.
The objects for PM are taken from 3 MIBS.
The solution needs no special HW beyond what is required in 802.3ae.

·	Not everyone in the team agreed to the layering model of having
Ethernet on top of SONET. The suggestion was to add a layer between
CSMACD
to SONET Path to indicate what kind of ETH over SONET payload mapping is
used.

Issues and Proposed Resolutions: 

1. Layering Model: 

Because the WIS payload mapping (i.e., 64B/66B encoded 
Ehternet data mapped directly into the STS-192c payload capacity, with
C2 
set to '00011010'b) is just one of several Ethernet over SONET payload 
mappings, it has been suggested that an additional ifStackTable layer in

between ethernetCsmacd(6) and sonetPath(50) should be present to
indicate 
what type of Ethernet over SONET payload mapping is being used. An
alternative 
suggestion is to use ifMauType and ifMauDefaultType for this purpose.

Proposed Resolution: Keep the layering as currently defined in the 
internet-draft and use ifMauType and ifMauDefaultType to indicate the
type 
of Ethernet over SONET.

2. Compliance: 

Should the ETHER-WIS and SONET-MIB objects be required for all 10GBASE-W

interfaces? An alternative would be to make them optional. In that case 
10GBASE-W interfaces would require a multi-layer ifStackTable only if
ETHER-WIS 
and SONET-MIB were supported; if not, then the usual single-layer model
would apply.

Proposed Resolution: Keep all the ETHER-WIS and SONET-MIB objects
mandatory as 
currently defined in the internet-draft.

3. Relationship with MAU-MIB: 

The next Mau-MIB draft should specify what happens to the ifStackTable
if 
ifMauDefaultType is changed from dot3MauType10GigBaseR to
dot3MauType10GigBaseW 
or vice-versa.

Proposed Resolution: The suggested was agreed. Mike Heard will provide
the 
text to be added to the Mau-MIB. 

4. Clarification on Compliance: 

Clarification text for compliance description in Section 3.1 is needed.

Proposed Resolution: Mike Heard will provide the clarification text for 
Section 3.1 regarding compliance.
It was decided to host the document in the HUBMIB group.

Internet Draft:
<http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-hubmib-wis
-mib
-01.txt>