FW: OPS-NM Area Open Meeting Minutes - IETF #50

["Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>]

Mmm... we got this just before the "minutes" cutoff.
Seems it never went to the ops-area list itself (I thought it was
copied to that list by the minute takers). Sorry for the delay.

And... Thanks to Andy and Dave.

Bert


> ----------
> From: 	Andy Bierman[SMTP:abierman@cisco.com]
> Sent: 	Tuesday, April 17, 2001 5:28 PM
> To: 	minutes@ietf.org
> Cc: 	Bert Wijnen; Randy Bush
> Subject: 	OPS-NM Area Open Meeting Minutes - IETF #50
> 
> OPS-NM Open Area Meeting Minutes
> IETF #50
> March 20, 2001
> Minutes by Andy Bierman and David Harrington
> 
> Agenda
> ------
> 
> 1) A-D status summary of OPS-NM area WGs (Bert Wijnen & Randy Bush)
> 2) IPv6 MIB Design Team Report (David Thaler)
> 3) Reusable RowPointer TC Proposal (Bob Moore)
> 4) Open Q&A
> 
> Minutes
> -------
> 
> 1) WG Status Summary
> 
> Randy Bush presented a quick summary of the OPS WGs:
> 
> AAA - proceeding along okay; recently held an interim meeting.
> Major areas that have been worked on are transport profiles, security,
> and data modeling. Transport has settled down. Security and data
> modeling are still being discussed.
> 
> BMWG - very productive. Focuses on devices, not systems. IPPM tests
> systems. Starting work on routing parameters.
> 
> DNSOP - working on experiment in distributed DNS using AnyCast.
> Will start working on v6 DNS transition requirements, including
> decisions affecting v6 (should different types of records be kept?).
> 
> GRIP - draft on security aspects of ISP behavior approved by IESG
> recently. The WG will look into logging requirements this summer.
> 
> MBONED - how to build up mcast infrastructure; currently documenting 
> existing practice and improving diagnostic support. 
> 
> NASREQ - requirements for AAA; WG currently dormant.
> 
> NGTRANS - overview and how to transition. Currently examining how to 
> find tunnels on the WAN and how an Ipv6 devices gets out of the tunnel 
> onto the WAN; Also working on integration of IPv6 with DNS.
> 
> MULTI6 - multi-homing causing increase in small BGP announcements;
> Schemes for IPv6 address assignment for multi-homing are being 
> considered to solve this problem; Trying to avoid announcements 
> of small aggregates.
> 
> PTOMAINE - address space announcement consumption. Studying the
> patterns looking for possibilities for aggregation. Assuming 
> changes to BGP and router code are in scope.
> 
> Bert Wijnen presented a quick summary of the NM WGs:
> 
> ADSLMIB - cruising along; Requirements work (from DSL Forum) is done 
> already, and ADSL extension mib is in AD review. The ADSL2 MIB is in 
> WG last call, and the VDSL mib in in progress.
> 
> BRIDGE - Keith McCloghrie on sabbatical, so Les Bell is taking 
> over as WG Chair. WG needs to advance documents, but no new work
> is progress.
> 
> ENTMIB - Keith on sabbatical; RFC 2737 ready for advancement to draft
> standard. No new work, but new chair needed to work on advancement.
> [soon after the IETF, Margaret Wasserman was appointed as WG Chair.]
> 
> HUBMIB - completed all work items, and now looking to advance documents.
> New IEEE MIB work starting; Dan Romascanu acting as liaison for IETF 
> to IEEE in order to get access to IEEE documents; cannot redistribute 
> them, but WG members can view documents to verify MIBs.
> 
> RMONMIB - several pieces of work completed. The WG wants to do SSPM -
> configuration of synthetic sources for performance management. 
> High capacity RMON mibs are completed, and the slightly modified 
> RMON and RMON2 modules will be updated with a new publication process.
> The HC-RMON document will describe the enumeration objects that were 
> extended, and the updated MIB modules will be stored at IANA or some 
> other suitable site.
> 
> Infiniband MIB BOF - IP over Infiniband device; also need another MIB 
> to manage Infiniband network fabric. Trying to have 1 WG instead of 2
> to do this work.
> 
> SNMPCONF - milestones are overdue. Good interaction with Diffserv.
> Original design of Diffserv MIB changed, which improved diffserv. 
> We might consider modifying mibs to better meet the needs of policy 
> mgmt. BCP needs more input, and the document may be helpful to correct
> problems in some existing mibs. Further discussion to ensue.
> 
> DISMAN - new work on alarm mibs in progress, which was started
> in the ATOMMIB WG, but moved to this WG to create a generalized
> (instead of ATM-specific) solution. New versions of the Script MIB
> and Schedule MIB will recycle at proposed.
> 
> EOS - WG will address the high priority SNMP items that have been 
> postponed due to SNMPv3 work, such as OID compression, efficient 
> set operations; the WG will consider new PDU types; want to 
> improve performance of SNMP, but will not make changes to RFC 2571 
> architecture.
> 
> SMING - Chartered to merge SMIv2 and SPPI (COPS-PR) and add 
> OO-based concepts to the SMI. Trying to create one data 
> modeling language in the IETF for all mgmt info; need to
> use pragmatic approach and contain scope of work.
> 
> SNMPv3 - WG limited in scope to advancement of SNMPv3 RFCs
> to full standard.
> 
> There have been a number of requests for new SNMPv3 security approaches.
> Documents cannot get past IESG without security. We want to have WGs
> define additional security mechanisms, but we have been pushing back in
> SNMPv3 and RAP. ADs have discussed with Security Ads, trying to get
> security extensions done in the security area. Security A-Ds should
> identify which security protocols to support; also need to discuss who
> should do the mapping.
> 
> POLICY - 1 RFC after 3 years; now doing PCIM extensions; mapping to
> schema and QDEN moving along, and near WG last call.
> 
> RAP - COPS-PR RFC will be out any day; SPPI was in IETF Last Call,
> ready to be RFC, when SMING WG started; the Framework MIB needs
> to move to PS; The WG chair has changed, and new charter items are
> under discussion, such as COPS over TLS and COPS over CLS; 
> 
> At this point, a discussion about too many security protocols occurred; 
> The following issues were raised:
>   - some do not want too many security transports on standards track;
>   - where should be done, OPS or Security area?
>   - distinction needed between defining new security protocols and 
>     defining mappings for a particular application over a particular
>     (existing) security protocol.
> 
> AGENTX - This WG is planning to deactivate.
> 
> 2) IPv6 MIB Design Team Report
> 
> The design team is chartered to look at IPv4-centric MIBs 
> and determine how to transition them to use the InetAddress MIB.
> Recently, new TCs were added to the INET-ADDRESS-MIB module.
> The following issues were raised for particular MIBs:
>   - UDP-MIB: add connection table, some counters.
>   - TCP-MIB: add tcpListener table, more counters
>     UDP and TCP expressed connections different ways; tried to align.
>   - IP-FORWARDING MIB: what do modern ribs look like?
>   - IP-MIB: want to get rid of ipv6InterfaceIndex
>     Ipv6IfTable - need help understanding this table; more counters;
> 
> The design team is currently seeking implementation feedback
> from implementors of these MIBs. Send input to OPS area 'mibs' 
> mailing list.
> 
> Refer to the following URL for more information:
> http://www.ops.ietf.org/ipv6mib-charter.html
> 
> 3) Reusable Row TC Proposal
> 
> The need for a new type of RowPointer TC grew out of work in
> the snmpconf, diffserv, and policy WGs. The DS MIB separates 
> data path elements (meters, markers, etc.) from the tables 
> which contain the parameters on how these DP elements will operate.
> A template is the combination of data path elements; parameters
> are outside the template; multiple copies of data elements
> exist, but only one copy of the parameters may exist.
> 
> Duplicating the templates is a problem because it is unclear whether
> pointers are deep or shallow, and making multiple copies of 
> parameters makes an implementation much harder to maintain.  Row 
> pointers may point to the same row, or to a copy of a row - it is 
> important to know which.
> 
> The current proposal is the I-D draft-ietf-ops-rowpointer-tc-01.txt.
> 
> 4) Q & A Session
> 
> The following issues were raised during this part of the meeting:
>   - IEEE vs IETF process differences
>     - criteria for starting new work is stricter in IEEE
>   - what is the A-Ds' vision of where OPS-area is going?
>     - COPS-PR and SNMP protocols (should they merge?)
>       No: letting parallel paths proceed when there is no clear path
>   - what's wrong with SNMP; why CLI is more prevalent
>      - agent implementation vary in quality; never perfect
>      - agent design getting too complex
>      - intentionally no certification process in IETF
>      - example of security area: setup industry council to verify
>        implementations; SNMP vendors could do the same thing
>      - emphasis that not only large ISPs need net mgmt tools
>      - rigorous validation of net-mgmt is not done, as it is 
>        for security. 
>      - net-mgmt is not as interesting or important to operators
>        as other new features
>   - call for interest in new security work
>   - OID compression & OID suppression
>     - request for comments from operators on what the typical
>       SNMP traffic mix from NOC to agents
>   - support for overall vision of OPS area and design team to  
>     form and guide new work
>   - suggestion to have these meetings every IETF, not every 
>     other, but skip the WG status summaries
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
>