Interfaces MIB (ifmib)
----------------------
Charter
Current status: active working group
Chair(s):
Ted Brunner <ted.brunner@tek.com>
Network Management Area Director(s)
Marshall Rose <mrose.iesg@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
Mailing lists:
General Discussion:if-mib@thumper.bellcore.com
To Subscribe: if-mib-request@thumper.bellcore.com
Archive: thumper.bellcore.com:pub/tob/ifmib
Description of Working Group:
The Interfaces MIB Working Group is chartered to accomplish two tasks.
First, to develop a collection of managed objects which model the
relation between different entities in the data link and physical
layers. The working group will explore different modeling
approaches in order to develop a collection of objects which is
both correct in the modeling sense and has an acceptable impact (if
any) on the interfaces table from MIB-II and all media MIB modules
on the standards track or under development by a working group.
The objects defined by the working group will be consistent with
the SNMP framework.
Second, to prepare a recommendation to the IESG evaluating RFC 1229
(the interface-extensions MIB), RFC 1231 (the token-ring MIB), RFC 1304
(the SMDS MIB), and RFC 1398 (the ethernet-like MIB) with respect to the
standards track.
The recommendation will document implementation, interoperability,
and deployment experience. If these experiences suggest that
changes should be made to the documents, new drafts may be
prepared.
For RFCs 1229, 1231, and 1304, the recommendation will report one
of four outcomes for each RFC:
- that the RFC should be advanced from Proposed to Draft Standard status,
without changes (if no problems are found);
-that a draft prepared by the working group should replace
the RFC, and be designated a Draft Standard (if only minor changes
are made);
- that a draft prepared by the working group should
replace the RFC, and be designated a Proposed Standard (if major
changes or feature enhancements are made); or,
- that the RFC should be designated as Historic (if this technology
is problematic).
For RFC 1398, the recommendation will report one of five outcomes:
- that the RFC should be advanced from Draft Standard to Standard
status, without
changes (if no problems are found);
- that a draft prepared by the
working group should replace the RFC, and be designated a
Standard (if only editorial changes are made);
- that a draft
prepared by the working group should replace the RFCs, and be
designated a Draft Standard (if only minor changes are made);
- that
a draft prepared by the working group should replace the RFC, and
be designated a Proposed Standard (if major changes or feature
enhancements are made); or,
- that the RFC should be designated as
Historic (if this technology is problematic).
Goals and Milestones:
Done Post the interface layering document as an Internet-Draft.
Sep 93 Submit the interface layering document to the IESG for consideration
as a Proposed Standard.
Sep 93 Issue a call for implementation and operations experience with RFCs
1229, 1231, 1304, and 1398.
Oct 93 Evaluate experience and if necessary post revised MIBs as
Internet-Drafts.
Dec 93 Submit recommendations on the various MIBs to the IESG.
Internet-Drafts:
Posted Revised I-D Title <Filename>
------ ------- ------------------------------------------
Oct 93 Feb 94 <draft-ietf-ifmib-conntable-01.txt>
Management Information Base for Management of Network
Connections
Feb 94 Jun 94 <draft-ietf-ifmib-sipmib-01.txt>
Definitions of Managed Objects for SMDS Interfaces
Feb 94 New <draft-ietf-ifmib-types-00.txt>
Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface
Types
Apr 94 New <draft-ietf-ifmib-ethmib-smiv2-00.txt>
Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like Interface
Types
Request For Comments:
RFC Stat Published Title
------- -- ---------- -----------------------------------------
RFC1573 PS Jan 94 Evolution of the Interfaces Group of MIB-II
RFC1623 S May 94 Definitions of Managed Objects for the Ethernet-like
Interface Types