Subject: [ipcdn] IETF#62 - IPCDN wg minutes

From: "Jean-Francois Mule" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 15:03:04 -0700

See below, thank you again Greg for taking notes during the meeting. 
Note that the jabber log was also used.
 
I also copy the folks who have some action items and that includes Rich
and I ;)
 
Rich and Jean-Francois
IPCDN co-chairs.
 
------------------------------------------
IETF IPCDN Meeting Notes
IETF#62, IP over Cable Data Networks WG
Minneapolis, USA
Tuesday, March 8, 2005
 
Reported by Greg Nakanishi ([email-masked])
Edited by Jean-Francois Mule' ([email-masked])

--- WG Meeting Summary
--- ------------------
About ten IETF participants attended the IPCDN WG meeting at IETF #62
in Minneapolis on March 8 2005. Two participants joined the wg meeting
via the jabber session. Total meeting time was about one hour.
 
The meeting materials are consolidated into 1 deck of slides and are
provided as part of the IETF proceedings. They are also posted at
http://www.ipcdn.org/meetings.html
 
The slides provided for the meeting contain lots of details on the
wg status and Internet-Draft issues. The present notes do not
duplicate the slide content, please read the slides for details.
The action items (AI) are outlined and called out in the text below.

1/ Agenda Bashing
Greg Nakanishi volunteered to be the note taker.
A jabber session was also initiated with two participants: Bert
Wijnen, AD and area advisor for ipcdn and Eduardo Cardona, current
editor of a couple of Internet-Drafts. The jabber chat room was:
[email-masked]; Rich Woundy and Jean-Francois Mule
volunteered to be the jabber scribes during the meeting.
The proposed agenda was accepted by the wg without modifications, it
is also available at: http://www.ipcdn.org/meetings.html

2/ Administration
We reviewed the WG Charter & milestones (see slide 4) and
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ipcdn-charter.html
 
The chairs proposed to update milestone for the DOCSIS Cable Device
MIB v2 and the PacketCable MIBs to June 2005, that is be "wg done" by
June 2005 and formerly request publication which will start Ad and
IESG review.
Bert commented that June 2005 seems aggressive for completing the CD
MIB (via jabber). While this may be aggressive given the past pace,
with Kevin Marez as the new editor and the ad-hoc session with Randy
Presuhn we were able to organize at IETF to address some of Randy's
mib doctor comments on the draft, this should still be doable.
# AI: wg chairs to reflect new milestones when proposing updated IPCDN
# charter to AD
 
Bert also added that he hoped to pick up MIB reviews for the event MIB
and the RFIv2 MIB modules shortly after IETF.
# AI: wg chairs to follow-up with Bert and MIB co-authors to ensure
# mib doctors have been assigned to those 2 IPCDN DOCSIS I-Ds
# AI completed on 4/1/2005.

+ Concluding the IPCDN CableHome work items
The chairs (Jean-Francois speaking at the mike) proposed that the WG
drops the CableHome MIBs from the charter.  There were 6 expired
Internet-Drafts:
draft-ietf-ipcdn-cable-gateway-config-mib-00
draft-ietf-ipcdn-cable-gateway-tools-mib-00
draft-ietf-ipcdn-cable-gateway-device-mib-00
draft-ietf-ipcdn-cable-gateway-addressing-mib-00
draft-ietf-ipcdn-cable-gateway-security-mib-00
draft-ietf-ipcdn-cable-gateway-qos-mib-00

The rationale for concluding all the CH work items was discussed later
in the meeting and is documented on slide 41 of the meeting materials.
The AD Bert asked whether the CableHome mib modules had been rooted
under mib-2 at CableLabs (the answer is no which means from an IETF
point of view, we do not have the same worries as with some of the
earlier DOCSIS MIBs.
=> There was no objection from the WG participants in the room.
=> Via jabber, Bert accepted our explanations and agreed to reflect
   the WG decision by modifying the charter.
# Decision: wg and AD agreement to conclude the IPCDN CableHome work
# AI: wg chairs to propose new updated IPCDN charter reflecting the
# change

3/ IPCDN DOCSIS mibs
 
+ DOCSIS Cable Device MIB version 2
  draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-07.txt
  Editor: Kevin Marez
 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2-07.txt
We spent much of the meeting time discussing the update of the DOCSIS
cable device mibv2 and the open issues to advance this Internet-Draft.
Most of those issues were raised by the mib doctor review from Randy.
 
Note that the complete enumerated listing of all the draft07
modifications is available at:
http://www.ipcdn.org/meetings/cdmib-07-changes.doc
or http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ipcdn/
and a diff between draft06 and draft07 is at:
http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ipcdn/draft-ietf-ipcdn-device-mibv2/draft-ietf-
ipcdn-device-mibv2-07-from-06.diff.html
 
- Open issue #1: MIB compile warning in compliance statement
Multiple entries in the docsDevGroups are deprecated ex:
docsDevNmAccessGroup, docsDevSoftwareGroup, etc. The MIB compiler
complains with warning messages about compliance statements that
referred to deprecated objects.
Rich indicated he thought the inclusion of deprecated groups was not
proper practice, but that it was not prohibited per se. Rich added
that in the mib review guidelines, page 31, it says something about
it.
>From page 31:
| - The status of a compliance statement is independent of the status
|   of its members.  Thus, a current compliance statement MAY refer to
|   deprecated object groups or notification groups.  This may be
|   desirable in certain cases, e.g., a set of widely-deployed object
|   or notification groups may be deprecated when they are replaced by
|   a more up-to-date set of definitions, but compliance statements
|   that refer to them may remain current in order to encourage
|   continued implementation of the deprecated groups.
 
Bert commented that this practice is not allowed.
# AI: Kevin Marez to look into this issue further and propose a new
# compliance statement addressing the issue.
 
- Open issue #2
The docsDevEvReporting object description doesn't mesh well with the
RFC3413 guidelines. This was reported by Randy.
RFC3413 and RFC3014 overlaps with some logging objects in the CD MIB.
During the meeting, Kevin proposed that a clarification can be made in
the CD MIB that indicates that the CD MIB object only be applicable
when running in SNMPv1/2 mode and that RFC3413 be applicable when
running in Coexistence mode. Eduardo commented via jabber that that
proposal may not work.
# AI: Kevin to post pb statement and resolution to the list
# done on 3/11
Kevin also met with Randy after the IPCDN meeting and actually
proposed the following in an email sent on March 11 to the ipcdn
list:
Kevin wrote:
>My proposal would be to add another enumerated type (bit) for
>stdInterface(9) which would indicate the usage of RFC3413/RFC3014
>mechanisms for notifications.  There should be no problems with
>concurrent usage/support of both mechanisms so it would be possible
>to perform notifications in both places.  Or, do we want to consider
>this being an xor situation?  It would be necessary to exclude
>syslog(2) in this case, since neither RFC3413 nor RFC3014 covers this
>functionality.  Essentially, (stdInterface && syslog) XOR (local &&
>traps && localVolatile).
 
- Open Issue #3
The relationship between docsDevEventGroup, docsDevEventGroupv2 and
RFC3014 needs to be defined. There was no real discussion on this item
during the ipcdn meeting.
# AI: Kevin to address this issue on the list together with issue #3.

- Open Issue #4:
What is the purpose of the docsDevFilterPolicyObsoleteGroup group?
# Decision: since the objects have been obsoleted, we agreed to remove
# the group entirely. If anyone objects to Kevin's recommendation,
# please send your comments to the list.

+ RF MIB v2
  draft-ietf-ipcdn-docs-rfmibv2-13.txt
  Editor: Eduardo Cardona
 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-docs-rfmibv2-13.txt
We went through the slides which document the updates in draft 13. A
number of issues need to be resolved to release what will hopefully be
the last draft (see slide 18-21).
Rich asked if anyone had questions or comments on the changes made to
the draft: nobody had any comments.
# AI: Eduardo to close the issues by proposing resolutions to the list
# and release draft14 before June.

+ DOCSIS Event Notification MIB
  draft-ietf-ipcdn-docsisevent-mib-06.txt
  Editor: Greg Nakanishi
 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-docsisevent-mib-06.
txt
 
Greg commented that all AD comments were incorporated in draft06.
Bert should provide an additional review shortly after IETF#62.  Bert
asked the chairs to remind him.
# AI: Bert to do a final check on draft 06 of the ipcdn docsis event mib
# AI: chairs to remind Bert (done on 4/1/2005).
 
4/ IPCDN IPCablecom/PacketCable MIB Updates
 
+ PacketCable/IPCablecom MTA MIB
  draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-mtamib-06.txt
 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-mtamib-06.txt
 
The current status on MTA MIB draft 06 was presented by Jean-Francois.
A number of comments were made by Bert on draft06 (see slide 31). The
next step is to update the draft.
# AI: MTA MIB authors to update the draft by the end of May and
# release draft07.

+ PacketCable/IPCablecom Signaling MIB
  draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-signaling-08.txt
 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-signaling-08.t
xt
 
Sumanth is taking over editorship from Gordon Beacham (many thanks to
Gordon for leading the 7 revisions of the draft to date).
List of changes in draft07:
 http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipcdn/current/msg01594.html
 
Rich asked about the txGain and rxGain objects.  His understanding is
that most vendors implement equivalent objects in private MIBs.  He is
not concerned that these parameters cannot be set dynamically.  It is
OK to configure them at device startup.  Some operators had to reduce
the gain to reduce/prevent echo on the line.
Note that a patent disclosure was brought to the attention of the WG
by Jean-Francois Mule, ipcdn co-chair
 http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ipcdn/current/msg01593.html.
 
There are no pending issues on this draft.
# Decision: it was agreed by Bert and the chairs to issue a new WG
# Last Call as the next step.
 
+ PacketCable/IPCablecom Management Event MIB
  draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-eventmess-04.txt
 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ipcdn-pktc-eventmess-04.t
xt
 
Sumanth also took over the editorship of this draft. The MIB is not
widely implemented or tested at CableLabs to date (as it is not a core
requirement for PacketCable 1.0). The MIB functionality will become
mandatory for PacketCable 1.5 so Jean-Francois expressed interest in
advancing this MIB module to WG last call ASAP.s
 
Rich asks if this is the version of the MIB that gets rid of the
distinction between fixed and programmable events. Answer is yes.
 
Bert commented that if this MIB is being implemented it (under the
CableLabs root while awaiting ipcdn RFC), it is better to get some MIB
doctor review ASAP.
 
# AI: chairs to send a note to request review from Randy and/or Bert
 
5/ CableHome MIB modules
The chairs would like to discuss the withdrawal of all the CableHome
MIB Ids from our IETF IPCDN charter with the wg participants. We will
then consider make this proposal to the ADs.
 
There have been no updates to the IETF Internet-Drafts since June 2003.
Bert asked if there is no activity in both IETF and CableLabs.
Jean-Francois indicated that there has been some changes within the
CableLabs MIBs. After consulting with some vendors participant in IETF
and the internal CableLabs CableHome team in February 2005 (before
IETF#62), there is not enough vendor or CableLabs support to
advance those MIBs in IETF: we cannot find any committed resources to
do this.
see slide 41.
Burt asks if the CableLabs CableHome MIBs were rooted under MIBII.
The answer is 'no', there are under the CableLabs enterprise OID.
Bert stated that if that is the case, we don't have to worry about it
as much as we did for the DOCSIS mibs (from an IETF point of view).
Rich Woundy and Greg N agree that the best path forward is to remove
them from the charter. Bert accepted the chair proposal and is ok with
charter update to remove them.
 
As indicated in section 2/ of these notes:
# Decision: wg and AD agreement to conclude the IPCDN CableHome work
# AI: wg chairs to propose new updated IPCDN charter reflecting the
# change

6/ IPCDN WG next steps
Beyond the action items noted above and implementation of the various
decisions the wg agreed to, the following is our work plan:
 - Finish all DOCSIS MIBs by June 2004
 - Request publication for
   PacketCable/IPCablecom MTA MIB
   PacketCable/IPCablecom Signaling MIB
 - Advance expert + mib doctor reviews for Management Event MIB for
   MTAs
 - Revise IPCDN Charter Milestones
 
>.end of the IETF#62 ipcdn meeting notes
------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
IPCDN mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipcdn