Minutes of the Joint Meeting of hubmib and atommib at the 53rd IETF
2002-04-05 15:46:56 GMT
Please find below the minutes of the joint meeting of the hubmib and atommib Working Groups in Minneapolis.
MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING OF THE HUBMIB AND ATOMMIB WG
TUESDAY, March 19, 2002
1700-1800 Afternoon Sessions IV
INT atommib &OPS &hubmib AToM MIB WG & Ethernet Interfaces and Hub MIB WG
Chairs: Dan Romascanu - dromasca <at> avaya.com, Faye Ly - fayely98 <at> hotmail.com, Nathan Kohn - mvnk <at> lucent.com
Introductions, Agenda bashing, Minutes Taker - 5 min
IEEE 802.3 status - Dan Romascanu - 10 min
WIS MIB Status and Open Issues Resolution - Mike Heard and KC Norseth - 30 min
Next Steps, How to complete WGs Charter - 15 min
Minutes taken by Randy Presuhn - randy_presuhn <at> bmc.com
There were no major changes to the proposed agenda for the
joint atommib / hubmib meeting.
There was a update on the IEEE 802.3ae activity. Problems had
been identified in the conformance clauses, and a new internal
letter is planned. Draft 4.1 is in ballot, and draft
4.2 is hoped for by March 18, with an IEEE interim planned in
April and completion targeted for June, 2002. Fortunately, all
major management-related comments have already been resolved.
The status report on the WIS (WAN Interface Sublayer)
MIB presented at the IEEE 803.2ae interim meeting
indicated that the IEEE liked it, and that there
was no contention surrounding the resolution of issues.
Recent changes include the addition of a new test pattern
type, changing some flags to enumerations, and trace object
The editors of the WIS MIB are aware of a few edits that will
be needed, and the plan is to wait for the 4.2 update
from the IEEE, do a sanity check between the MIB and the
GDMO definitions, then issue a working group last call
on a document with an annex identifying known problems.
The document forwarded to the IESG will need to be "clean".
The WG last call will be done in the hubmib WG, but will
also be announced on the atommib WG mailing list.
A review of RFC 2558 implementations from five different
vendors showed that, when taken together, every object
was supported by at least two implementations. The plan
is to recommend the document for advancement from Proposed
to Draft Standard.
The final discussion concluded that those present did not
see a need for another joint meeting.