48 IETF ADSL MIB WG Mike Sneed, Dave Allan co-chairs, Mike chaired, Dave took minutes. Agenda Agenda bashing Ext MIB status DSL Forum update HDSL2 MIB RFC 2662 Path Forward Administivia: New mailing list was announced: General Discussion: XDSLMIB@LISTSERV.ECIRALEIGH.COM To Subscribe: LISTSERV@LISTSERV.ECIRALEIGH.COM In Body: subscribe/signoff XDSLMIB Archive: index XDSLMIB/get Rajesh Abbi introduced as co-editor of the HDSL2 MIB draft. Ext MIB status Ext MIB has been recommend to be moved to proposed standard. Its in the queue. DSL Forum Update A liason letter from the DSL Forum regarding comments on the HDSL2 MIB was presented: From: Gavin Young, DSL Forum Technical Committee Chair gavin.2.young@bt.com Date: 8/9/00 Subject: Comments on 70.170 "IETF Internet Draft for HDSL2 management" Thank you for the opportunity to review and provide comments to your Internet Draft, "Definitions of Managed Objects for HDSL2 Lines" also known as draft-ietf-adslmib-hdsl2-00.txt. We would like to strongly recommend the following actions to be taken by the IETF ADSLMIB working group: 1. Expand your working group scope to include the management of SHDSL. It is also suggested to provide a single MIB for both line code technologies. 2. Provide a copy of this Internet Draft for our technical review at our August 29, 2000 meeting. Deadline for this submittal is August 21, 2000. We will provide a liaison letter upon review. 3. Schedule your Internet Draft working group last call to commence after the aforementioned DSL Forum meeting. 4. Take the RFC-2662's structure into consideration where appropriate when developing this new Internet Draft. 5. Please make the following content and editorial changes to the Internet Draft: o Consider deletion of Internet Draft's DS1-specific objects that is currently covered in RFC-2495. o Add text to clarify when changes to profiles take affect once they are changed. o Split MIB tables that contain both configuration and statistical objects into two separate tables containing each type of information. o Change conformance for timeout date and timeout time objects to be optional. o Add the ability to pre-provision the number of repeater units in a span configuration. o Adopt a non-binding indexing scheme for the repeater units as proposed by DSL Forum document, 00-137, "Draft proposal for an SNMP MIB to manage HDSL2/SHDSL". o Add an implementation suggestion on how to set the value of component index of the Hdsl2Inventory table to use the value of physical entity index of the entity MIB. Thank you for your consideration on these comments. Sincerely, Gavin Young Cc: Greg Bathrick, IETF Liaison Officer At this point it was decided to move directly to the HDSL2 MIB presentation, rather than attempt to address the liaison points directly. Definition of managed objects for HDSL2 and SHDSL lines, Bob Ray/Verilink Draft expanded to include SHDSL. Based upon ANSI T1E1 42000-006 and ITU G.991.2 (G.SHDSL). Originally did HDSL2 as a T1 replacement, then moved to do SHDSL to include E1. HDSL2 support * Inventory * Topology * H2TU/DS1 configuration * Performance * H2TU DS1 performance * Line thresholds and traps * DS1 * Maintenance * Profile MIB written so DS1 can be excised quickly. SHDSL is multirate HDSL2 without mandatory DS1 interface. Setting speed and disabling remote testing is the difference. Topology: A HDSL2 line consists of at least 2 modems HTU-C and HTU-R. May also include up to 8 regenerators (HRUs). Suggestion to re-write the conformance w.r.t the DS1 items vs. RFC 2495. (Faye Ly etc.) Topology treats each modem on the line as an end point. Stats can be retrieved on a per modem basis. EMS can do any number of per segment or per line abstractions given this underlying infrastructure. Orkit's comments on RFC 2662 alignment. Response is this is symmetric unlike ADSL. There is no benefit to replicating the structure of the ADSL MIB. You'd double or triple the number of required tables. Better off with a single structure and an index. HDSL is different in that it has repeaters. Leon Bruckman/Orkit, our proposal included a way to deal with repeaters. Rob: The underlying MIB supports multiple views. It's up to the management app to do what is required to provide the requisite abstractions. Faye: also has to do with the number of tables fetched. Rajesh Abbi/Alcatel: modeled a link as a concatenation of C-R pairs. Clarification: the EOC is between the end device and each repeated, it is not span by span. Issue appears to be viewing the modems at either end of a line as a unique paired entity vs. simply indexed identical items. No resolution, going to the list. Faye: request that ITU references be added to the MIB. Performance monitoring, lots of input to expand to 30 days, (last 29 optional). Rolled up total. Discussion of textual conventions. Profiles, lots of profiles. Yaron Lederman: Missing a power spectral density parameter, agreed, noted. Known issues: * Its different from ADSL MIB. * Need to rename objects for shdsl. * Topology should reflect segments and not end points. * Power spectral density to be addressed. * Combining side and wire pair into a single textual convention is confusing. * Alarms should be segment oriented instead of endpoint oriented. * DS1 specific parameters should be removed. Added from Yaron: * How does this comply with the entity MIB. Faye: Consider moving the maintenance stuff to another MIB or segment it. RFC 2662 - seeking implementation experience. Yaron: we can provide information. Bert: advance to draft, Mike: may have to do a turn at proposed based on the issues that have come up. Meeting Closed. Note that there is post meeting discussion of an interim meeting to sort out issues with the HDSL2