| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 1184.1 | new OSI AM... | TOOK::DENSMORE | Dirty deeds done dirt cheap | Tue Jun 25 1991 10:36 | 31 |
| I am assuming that by NIST you mean the OSI Implementor's Workshop
(OIW) which is hosted at NIST. (I refer to it as NIST too but they
always take care to point out that OIW is not NIST but an independent
forum.) Anyway, I am our rep to the Network Management SIG and I'll
try to answer your question.
The MIL (not MIB) is a collection of object definitions which is
currently in a state of limbo. Several attempts have been made to
formalize these definitions by voting them into the Stable Agreements
that the OIW produces to define interoperable implementations and the
conformance requirements for such implementations. For a number of
reasons which I won't get into here, these attempts have failed. Given
this state of affairs AND the conflict between some of these objects
(Network and Transport in particular) and objects being defined by the
standards bodies, it is too soon to do any serious work with them.
When and if they become real, they will be managed using the OSI AM
which follows the CMIP/ROSE agreements reached by OIW, EWOS (Europe),
AOW (Asia/NZ/Australia) and a number of consortiums like the Network
Management Forum and T1M1. Theoretically the only work that will need
to be done is to convert the GDMO-formatted object definitions to MSL
and we can manage them using the existing protocol stack. (Note: the
OSI AM is not the DECnet/OSI (DNA Phase V) AM. It is a new AM
currently under development and testing.)
Sorry for being long-winded but I thought some background was
necessary. I have a copy of the MIL as it stood after the March
meeting. (I missed the June meeting but expect to get any revised text
later this summer.) If you want a copy, contact me offline
(TOOK::DENSMORE).
Mike
|
| 1184.2 | Will OSI AM manage DECnet/OSI too? | VAOU02::JBLAIR | party on dudes! | Tue Jun 25 1991 12:19 | 1 |
| Thanks.. Mike, will this new OSI AM be able to manage DECnet/OSI?
|
| 1184.3 | it's on the stack somewhere... | TOOK::DENSMORE | Dirty deeds done dirt cheap | Wed Jun 26 1991 08:32 | 12 |
| There are plans to merge the two AMs eventually. Nothing has been
committed as yet. Among other nits, DECnet/OSI speaks a DP version of
CMIP while the OSI AM speaks the current IS version. Object
identifiers aren't compatible. No show stoppers but a bit of work is
needed. (Yes, DECnet/OSI is migrating to IS CMIP but we will still
have the problem of two versions for some time.)
The user is not affected by having two AMs, at runtime anyway, since
both sets of entities will be equally accessible. Obviously he/she will
have to buy/install two AMs though.
Mike
|
| 1184.4 | MIL? | ENUF::GASSMAN | | Thu Jun 27 1991 14:26 | 2 |
| Mike, what's a MIL other than an OSI version of a MIB? ie, what do the
letters stand for?
|
| 1184.5 | standard standards? never! | TOOK::DENSMORE | Dirty deeds done dirt cheap | Fri Jun 28 1991 15:13 | 8 |
| MIL = Management Information Library
It is an OSI counterpart of a MIB. It's a collection of object definitions
in GDMO format. Someone is taking the Internet MIB and casting it in
GDMO. Does this mean that it will be a MIL and not a MIB? Beats me:-)
When we put it in MSL maybe we should call it a DECmil (tm) :-) :-)
Mike
|
| 1184.6 | | TOOK::STRUTT | Management - the one word oxymoron | Mon Jul 01 1991 12:52 | 7 |
| Maybe it would help to think of the MIL as a library of MIB
definitions.
In reality, as originally conceived by the OIW and separately by the
NMF (although both by the same human being - work that one out), the
MIL would contain both the definitions and pointers to where other
definitions exist (eg. for standards-based managed object definitions).
|