CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_ Reported by Michael Erlinger/Micro Technology Remote LAN Monitoring Minutes o Copies of ``How to Write SNMP MIB,'' the Novell LANtern MIB (available on-line), and preliminary MIBs from Spider, NAT, and Frontier were distributed. o Wednesday evening meeting was scheduled. o Other Working Groups involved in similar activities were discussed: Accounting Working Group (accounting-wg@bbn.com), Operational Statistics (new group), and Benchmarking Methodology (bmwg@harvisr.harvard.edu). o The Working Group Charter was quickly reviewed and it was noted that the effort is correct, but that various milestone dates were now changed. o The Chair wanted make it clear that writing assignments would be made prior to the close of the IETF meeting. o Remote LAN monitoring could be accomplished in a number of ways: dedicated devices (e.g., LANtern), devices with other tasks (e.g., hubs), and software running on a workstation (e.g., SGIs systems). o Currently there are two SNMP products that seem to fall into the Remote Lan Monitoring arena: Novell's LANtern and FTP's LanWatch. Novell`s MIB is the only one available in the MIB directory on venera. o Spider, NAT, and Frontier have all announced products, or the intention to produce a product. They each provided very preliminary MIBs to the Working Group (hardcopy only). o The remainder of the meeting was spent reviewing the Spider, NAT, and Frontier MIBs with the idea of using these MIBs for development of a common MIB the Working Group goal. - Spider: Anne Ambler Of Spider - While the SNMP philosophy is to reduce agent processing effort, Spider chose to increase the complexity of the agent because it is a dedicated agent. - Spider has support for both Ethernet and TokenRing. - Spider provides out-of-band support for probe access. 1 The Spider discussion was long and detailed as the document is one hundred pages. Discussion was spent on the problems of packet capture, packet return to the NMS, counter wrap around, and other issues. Steve Waldbusser was asked to present some of these issues to the SNMP Steering Group. Spider will post the MIB as soon as it is finalized. NAT - Mike Erlinger: No one from NAT was at the IETF and thus only a short summary of the available document was attempted. Frontier - Steve Waldbusser: The discussion centered on filters and packet capture. Steve believes that he has an algorithm that would allow efficient transfer of bulk data from a probe to an NMS. He talked about the algorithm and will present his findings via the mail list. HP - Gary Ellis: A short discussion on the HP LanProbe and its incorporation of SNMP was presented. Wednesday Evening Meeting Attendees represented CMU, Concord, Contel, David Systems, Hewlett-Packard, MTI, and Spider Systems. A ``segment'' is defined as ``everything a probe can see'' (this seemed to be necessary to get some agreement on MIB group names). It was reiterated that the SMI states that while implementation of a MIB Group is optional, if that group is implemented, all objects in that group are mandatory; also, a MIB should have only a single level of groups, each of which contains objects (but not groups). Traffic Generation was controversial; it was agreed that any support in a standard MIB will be for simple capabilities (e.g., a single defined packet that can be sent a number of times with a specified interframe period); we will call the group SendPackets instead of Traffic Generation to emphasize the simplicity. The Administration groups will be difficult to define; although many of the objects that might go here are vendor-specific, there is some subset of objects that are common to all probes; we will need to identify this ``least common denominator'' subset for inclusion in the MIB. It was agreed that it is a goal to get a proposed standard MIB out of the March IETF; in support of this, the first RLAN MIB will be built to reflect capabilities in currently available probes; later versions can add features for which there are not currently any implementations. The next meeting of the group will be during the first week of February; notice will be sent to the rlanmib mailing list. First Pass at an rlanmib MIB organization: o MIB-groups:Ethernet Segment Counters - Ethernet Segment Log - Ethernet Station Counters - Ethernet Segment Log - Ethernet Traffic Matrix Counters - Ethernet Traffic Matrix Log 2 - Thresholds Notifications - Protocol Event Notifications - Filters - Triggers - Packet Capture - Test -- TDR - Test -- Echo Protocols - Test -- Traceroute - Test -- SendPackets - Administration -- Out of Band Access - Administration -- Program Download - Administration -- Trap Tables - Administration -- Probe Status - Administration -- Authentication Steve Waldbusser will edit the Ethernet side of the document, Anne Ambler will edit the Token Ring side and Mike Erlinger will coordinate the document development. The Chair wants to thank Gary Ellis and Sudhanshu Verma for providing meeting notes. Attendees Anne Ambler anne@spider.co.uk Karl Auerbach karl@eng.sun.com Scott Bradner sob@harvard.edu Ken Brinkerhoff Theodore Brunner tob@thumper.bellcore.com Jeffrey Case case@cs.utk.edu James (Chuck) Davin jrd@ptt.lcs.mit.edu Kurt Dobbins dobbins@ctron.com Gary Ellis garye@hpspd.spd.hp.com Fred Engel Robert Enger enger@seka.scc.com Mike Erlinger mike@mti.com Richard Fox sytek!rfox@sun.com Brian Handspicker bd@vines.enet.dec.com Ken Jones uunet!konkord!ksj Christopher Kolb kolb@psi.com William Kutz Kutz@dockmaster.ncsc.mil Mark Leon leon@nsipo.arc.nasa.gov John Lunny jlunny@twg.com Donna McMaster mcmaster@davidsys.com Lynn Monsanto monsanto@sun.com Bahaa Moukadam David Perkins dave_perkins@3com.com Robert Reschly reschly@brl.mil Kary Robertson 3 Bill Rust wjr@ftp.com Ray Samora rvs@proteon.com Jon Saperia saperia@tcpjon.enet.dec.com Lance Sprung Ron Strich ssds!rons@uunet.uu.net Glenn Trewitt trewitt@nsl.pa.dec.com Sudhanshu Verma verma@hpindbu.cup.hp.com David Waitzman djw@bbn.com Steven Waldbusser waldbusser@andrew.cmu.edu 4