Subject: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-smith-bridge-qosmib-00.txt

From: Andrew Smith <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 17:44:01 -0700

I'd like to propose that the Bridge MIB WG look into using the Diffserv MIB
for representing QoS in bridges. Please take a look at the ID referenced
here - I hope this draft could become the basis of a standards'-track work
item from this WG.

Andrew

****************************************************************
Andrew Smith                              tel: +1 (408) 579-2821
Extreme Networks                          fax: +1 (408) 579-3000
3585 Monroe St.                   http://www.extremenetworks.com
Santa Clara CA 95051-1450        em:  [email-masked]
****************************************************************

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 4:03 AM
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-smith-bridge-qosmib-00.txt

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.

	Title		: Management Information Base for QoS Extensions for
                          Bridges based on the Differentiated Services      
                          Architecture
	Author(s)	: A. Smith
	Filename	: draft-smith-bridge-qosmib-00.txt
	Pages		: 19
	Date		: 12-Jun-00
	
This memo describes a SMIv2 MIB module for a device implementing
bridging functions with Quality-of-Service mechanisms similar to those
described for the Differentiated Services Architecture [DSARCH] which
are described in detail by the Differentiated Services Router Conceptual
Model [MODEL].  A MIB module for routers, the Diffserv MIB [DSMIB], has
been developed that uses this model. The MIB module defined in this memo
is designed to work in conjunction with that module: it defines usage
for objects in that module and defines some new objects specific to MAC-
layer bridges (a.k.a. Layer-2 switches). Specifically, if defines
layer-2 classifier and packet marking functionality.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-smith-bridge-qosmib-00.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-smith-bridge-qosmib-00.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-smith-bridge-qosmib-00.txt".
	
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2000 17:44:03 -0700

---

From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 11:35:23 +0200

Well, let us first see what the reactions are in this WG.

Bert

> ----------
> From: 	Andrew Smith[SMTP:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 	Wednesday, June 14, 2000 2:44 AM
> To: 	Bridge Mib (E-mail)
> Cc: 	Wijnen, Bert (Bert); Randy Bush (E-mail)
> Subject: 	FW: I-D ACTION:draft-smith-bridge-qosmib-00.txt
> 
>

---

From: "Rijhsinghani, Anil" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 10:46:26 -0400

Andrew:

Can you please expand?  The Bridge MIB is a collection of objects
based on work done on bridging standards in 802.1.  RFC 2674
already specifies objects for "Class of Service" capability based
on 802.1p.  I don't see how the Bridge MIB can be updated using
the Diffserv MIB for QoS, or any other MIB.. it seems to
me that the MIB for a bridge should be derived from the
standards upon which it is built. Are you suggesting
a new standard for extended functions in Bridges, to be specified by
the IETF?  If so, can we first run this by the 802.1
Bridge standardization working group.

Regards,
Anil

> Sent: 	Tuesday, June 13, 2000 8:44 PM
> To: 	Bridge Mib (E-mail)
> Cc: 	'Bert Wijnen'; Randy Bush (E-mail)
> <<Message: >>

---

From: Andrew Smith <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2000 08:19:01 -0700

OK, then let's call it the XXXXXBridge MIB instead if you believe that there
is such a strict definition of what a "Bridge MIB" is. I think you're taking
too narrow a view of what IETF should work on. I think this work item would
be a pragmatic reflection of the fact that layer-2 and layer-3 "switches"
are effectively one and the same thing these days (i.e. addressing and QoS
are orthogonal). 

If you take a purist argument then you are losing site of the fact that
these devices do exist in large numbers today and you would be missing an
opportunity for common management standards for them. So far, IEEE 802 has
not seen a need to standardise the forwarding mechanisms any further and
that is fine - there are plenty of existing forwarding mechanisms defined by
standards' bodies other than IEEE 802 that are equally applicable to layer-2
bridges (e.g. IETF Diffserv). In fact, if you read some of the Diffserv
references that I refer to in this draft, you'll see that a 802.1p-capable
layer-2 bridge falls into the definition of a Diffserv-capable device
(there's nothing that says such a device has to classify trraffic based on
IP-layer things). So, in this case, my proposal is "derived from the
standards on which it is built".

Andrew

> From:	Rijhsinghani, Anil [SMTP:[email-masked]]
> Sent:	Wednesday, June 14, 2000 7:46 AM
> To:	Bridge Mib (E-mail); 'Andrew Smith'
> Subject:	RE: I-D ACTION:draft-smith-bridge-qosmib-00.txt
> 
> Andrew:
>

---

From: Dan Romascanu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 14:37:54 +0200

I agree with Andy's point. I think that we should not make again the
semantics mistake that (IMO) delayed at least with a couple of years the
standardization of the extensions to the Bridge MIB for VLANs - because we
waited for the 802.1 Committee to formally complete its work.

Note that this is currently an individual contribution. From a procedural
point of view, we should probably name this module DiffServ-Capable Bridge
MIB. If we want to make it an official work item for the Bridge MIB WG, we
need to ask for Bridge MIB Charter to be updated? Andy, do you intent to
propose this? The Pittsburgh meeting might be a good occasion to start this.

Regards,

Dan

> From:	Andrew Smith [SMTP:[email-masked]]
> Sent:	Wed June 14 2000 17:19
> To:	Rijhsinghani, Anil; Bridge Mib (E-mail)
> > > I'd like to propose that the Bridge MIB WG look into using the
> Diffserv
> > > MIB

---

From: Andrew Smith <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 09:51:44 -0700

Thank you Dan. Yes, this is my intent, with the support of the WG of course
(or we could do a new WG but I think we might as well re-use the existing
structure). I'm fine with that name/title. I wanted to see some discussion
of this proposal on the Bridge MIB list (if our esteemed WG chair does not
thiink this topic out of scope). If people think this a good idea, please
comment on the list - that is how to gauge whether the WG thinks we should
pursue this. I'd rather do this on the mailing list than at IETFmeeting if
possible.

Andrew

> From:	Dan Romascanu [SMTP:[email-masked]]
> Sent:	Thursday, June 15, 2000 5:38 AM
> To:	'Andrew Smith'; Rijhsinghani, Anil; Bridge Mib (E-mail)
> > that is fine - there are plenty of existing forwarding mechanisms
> defined
> > by
> > > > here - I hope this draft could become the basis of a
> standards'-track
> > > work
> > > > item from this WG.
> > > > 
> > > > Andrew
> > > >