Subject: SIG Meeting at the upcoming AIW

From: "Richard L. Daugherty ((919) 254-6838)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 95 17:43:04 EDT

The next AIW is rapidly approaching.  I want to update
everyone on what is expected to be covered at the
APPN/HPR MIBs SIG on Monday.

The SIG meeting will be used to gain a consensus on the
overall structure and defination of the two MIBs.  That
is, an agreement on an Approved Direction.  To that goal
I expect to structure the meeting in the following
fashion:

       1.  Discussion/review of the draft APPN MIB
       2.  Discussion/review of proposed changes to the APPN MIB
       3.  Discussion/review of the draft HPR MIB
       4.  Discussion/review of proposed changes to the HPR MIB

I expect items 1 and 2 to take most of the time.

The updated drafts of the APPN and HPR MIBs should be
available by the end of this week.  It is my understanding
that both IBM and CISCO will be proposing additional changes.

In addition to reviewing the MIBs and any proposals made
via e-mail, I would like for attendees to think about the
following before the meeting.

      a.  Handling of MIB browsers
          To what extend should the information in the
          MIBs be duplicated or structure to
          the usage of MIB browsers?

      b.  Port and Link structures
          Relationships to other MIBs?
          Duplication of information which might be in
          another MIB?
          How should addressing information be handled?

      c.  The size of the MIB
          What should be done about narrowly useful objects?
          At least one company has requested that
          objects not be included by "default".

      d.  Alerts and/or trap
          Should traps be added for problems that require
          immediate action?  (e.g. TDU wars)

Rich Daugherty
[email-masked]
SIG Chair

---

From: Bob Clouston <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 95 14:03:55 EDT

>           immediate action?  (e.g. TDU wars)
Another important issue to think about is how concerned we are with IETF
approval of these MIBs.  This may have some bearing on items such
as the DLC format registry proposal, the overall MIB size, and whether
there should be more administrative (read-write) control of configurable
objects (with min access read-only for products not wishing to be
configured via SNMP).

Bob Clouston