CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_ Reported by Michael Erlinger/Micro Technology Minutes of the Remote LAN Monitoring Working Group (rmonmib) The Group congratulated itself on the acceptance of the RMON MIB as a Proposed Standard and its having been published as RFC 1271. Inter-Operation Testing The Group discussed the possible venues for testing of various RMON MIB implementations. There seemed to be at least four possibilities: 1. Internet - RMON MIB implementations could be made available via the Internet. Those wishing to make available a particular implementation could do so by announcing via the RMON mailing list the location of the RMON device. Those wishing to test that device could access it via the Internet. The discussion centered on the possible Internet load created by such devices. It was concluded that this load should be minimal as this is only a test environment, not a management environment. 2. IETF - It might be possible to create a RMON test environment at the next IETF. The Chair will look into the possibilities of using CERFNet or USD facilities for creation of such a test environment which would be open to all those wishing to test RMON tools. 3. RMON Meeting - Although token ring had not been discussed, it was suggested that if there are any token ring meetings outside of the IETF meeting, then an RMON testing environment could be staged at the same time. The Chair indicated that this would be considered in the scheduling of any such meetings. Discovery There had been a BOF the prior evening associated with device discovery. At the BOF there seemed to be a consensus that the RMON Working Group should investigate device discovery as a possible RMON MIB extension. Much discussion ensued as to the definition of discovery, current MIBs associated with discovery, and priority within RMON. It was decided that the Chair should get together with Fred Baker and come to a better understanding of what is being requested. In particular, detail requirements need to be created. Token Ring It was decided that creating RMON token ring extensions should be the top priority for the Group. The current mailing list would continue to 1 serve the RMON group (no separate token ring mailing list would be created). It was decided that before January 1, 1992, the Chair would publish a proposed Charter and a proposed schedule which would include a meetng prior to the March IETF. Other Other RMON issues were discussed. In particular row creation. It was suggested that the row creation reference within the RMON specification be clarified by adding additional examples, (e.g., what happens when a row contains a read only value?). Attendees Robert Austein sra@asylum.sf.ca.us Steve Bostock steveb@novell.com Jeffrey Buffum buffum@vos.stratus.com Lida Carrier lida@apple.com James Codespote jpcodes@tycho.ncsc.mil James Davin jrd@ptt.lcs.mit.edu Michael Erlinger mike@lexcel.com Jeff Erwin Bill Fardy fardy@ctron.com Darrell Furlong Shawn Gallagher gallagher@quiver.enet.dec.com Robin Iddon robini@spider.co.uk Ronald Jacoby rj@sgi.com Mark Kepke mak@cnd.hp.com Ron Lau rlau@synoptics.com Jim McQuaid David Perkins dperkins@synoptics.com Jonathan Saperia saperia@tcpjon.enet.dec.com Timon Sloane peernet!timon@uunet.uu.net Bruce Taber taber@interlan.com Kaj Tesink kaj@nvuxr.cc.bellcore.com Mark Therieau markt@python.eng.microcom.com Maurice Turcotte dnmrt@interlan.com Steven Waldbusser waldbusser@andrew.cmu.edu Jeremy Wilson June-Kang Yang natadm!yang@uunet.uu.net 2