Subject: [Hubmib] IETF 52 HUBMIB Minutes - Monday Afternoon

From: "K.C. Norseth" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:02:25 -0700

Notes from the Monday MeetingHere are the minutes I took.  I hope they are
OK.  If anyone has any comments or corrections  to add, let me know.  If no
one has any comments to add, I will send them to the IETF.

K.C.

-------------------------------------------------------------

HUBMIB WG  IETF 52,  Salt Lake City
Monday afternoon session II
Notes
K.C. – Minutes taker
Dan Romascanu  discussion leader

The agenda from the main agenda link is invalid.  IETF isn't concerned.
The real hubmib agenda can be found at:
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/01dec/hubmib.txt

IEEE 802.13 Status Report
1 IEEE meeting since London
802.ea
draft 34 in ballot between 11/17 and 12/3
Sponsor Ballot to follow
Standard expected 3/02 and 6/02
802.3af
D3.0 in Ballot between 11/16 & 12/30
Standard expected between 9/02 and 11/02
Standard slightly behind time
Chnages expected
802.3ah  (ethernet first mile)
WG formed – 9/01
Four tracks:
·        Fiber p2p
·        Copper p2p
·        Fiber p2mp
·        OAM

·        Far from IETF involved still too early in IEEE

RFC’s
1515 – should be obsoleted by 2668 – was not.
2108
2665
2666
2668
Confusion is there due to duplication of rfc’s.
Next rfc on MAU mib will obsolete 1515 and 2668
Need implementation reports.
Enterasys wanted some issues answered before they implement implementation
reports.
Would be nice to get implementation reports of where

John Flick
Problems with hardware help decide that non-essential items will not be
discussed.

Etherlike MIBS
What do we do with the test oids now that the table is gone? – depricate?
What about multiple manager stations? managing multiple managers testing atr
the same time so we don’t override each other.
rfc1229 Interfaces extensions mib->rfc1273->deprecated for no
implementations.  We now have test oids not in use.  Recommended to
depricate and start a loopback test object. Will post new object to mailing
list.

Is the IFMTU clear.  Someone requested clarification to this, but it seems
clear.  It was decided that the person who doesn’t understand it to give
example.  It was decided to leave as is until the person can produce the
info.

Ifadminstatus (down) needs to be clarified  Mike Mcfadden brought up the
issue in the bridge wg where multiple vendors have multiple reactions to
this.  Fiber was not tested.  There needs to be clarification needed from
IEEE.  John will write text to ask and Dan will make the request.

issue on rfc1643 – 2 current versions of the Ethernet mib. – do we move it
to historic, full standard?  Should we put in our current draft an
explanation of why there are 2 drafts.  Some vendors are using rfc1643 with
private mibs.

MAU MIB
Some outstanding edits are still here.  There are some issues in the WIS MIB
and SONET that will affect some text.

Some issues from the IEEE test summit may affect this.  We will have to wait
until at least the end of January to get its information. Do we wait?
Issues that could come up are misunderstanding in the implementation? Some
packets and octets that could have misunderstanding.  It was decided to wait
for the test summit.

Some sonet entery in the ifstackentry stacktables issues.  This goes along
with the WIS MIB work.  Where do we do the clarification?  Decided we would
discuss this in the WIS mib meeting.

discussed the implementation of the autonegotion duplex info.  Some are
implementing the MAU mib as is.  Others are implementing this in the
priviate mibs due to being cumbersome.  GBIC swap may only be partly
relevant to the configuration.  Use a enumbericated integer for setting?
This is what some people are doing.  John had posted to the wg how HP is
doing their proprietary mib as a suggestion.
Forcing the autonegotiation down configuration came up.  Once again, not
having implementation reports to review against doesn’t help solve the
issue. We need more implementation reports.  There are some vendors that
have implemented the way as written.

Dan proposed that we do the updates to the mib as posted previously by John
as recommendation of the committee and let people see it. Mike H. suggested
some new oid’s written to help out with this.  People could help by
reviewing the jack type enumeration.
Power MIB
Dan, speaking
latest draft published November 2001
Misc spelling and compire warning errors were noted.
Changes resulting from IEEEportPortPowerPairs object deleted.
Delete off option of the powerportdetectioncontrol object
add new objects to powerdetectionstatus object.
delete powerportclassificationobject
update naming of objects
Reviewed some implementaion notes from powerDesine that will be added to
next version.
The IETF document status is stable. We don’t know what the IEEE is going to
do. For this reason just resping the draft and wait for the IEEE to go on.
Last-call may happen in Feb 02 depending on the IEEE.

The goal is to finish all for the IETF in Minneapolis. in March.

Goals and Milestones
Dec 01 – Gather implemention experience
Jan 02 – Issue revised drafts – Missed
Jan 02 – Forward drafts to AD/IESG – pushed to Feb.
Feb 02 – Last call in Feb.

_______________________________________________
Hubmib mailing list
[email-masked]
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hubmib

---

From: "K.C. Norseth" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 23:02:25 -0700

K.C.

RFC’s

John Flick

Etherlike MIBS

MAU MIB

Goals and Milestones