Subject: [MIB2RDML] Getting started: Existing MIB to XML and related resource model efforts

From: "Natale, Bob" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2007 14:00:47 -0400

Hi,
 
It appears that a sufficiently broad community of interest has now
subscribed to the IETF MIB2RMDL list that we can begin a discussion of
concepts, artifacts, methods, and goals...with the objective of
determining whether an effort to specify a standardized methodology for
converting SNMP MIBs to "resource models" which are more directly
accessible to an integrated SOA/Web Services management environment is
both feasible and of sufficient value to the Internet community to
warrant formation of an IETF WG in the Operations & Management Area.
 
I have spent some time since the MIB2RMDL "mini-BOF" in Prague this
past March ensuring that several of the non-IETF groups likely to be
critical to MIB2RMDL success are aware of and interested in the effort.
As a result, the set of subscribers to this list represents a variety
of specializations within the O&M domain -- thus, each of us might have
to offer a bit more background explanation (or pointers to it) when
making observations from our particular realm of expertise.
 
In my survey of the existing literature the following documents and
resources seem to summarize the state of SNMP MIB to XML work to date.
The first three result from work led by Frank Strauss and Torsten Klie;
the last two from work led by James Won-Ki Hong:

*	"Integrating SNMP Agents with XML-based Management Systems" at
http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/papers/commag-2004.pdf.
*	"Generating Skeleton Code for NETCONF Modules from SMI MIB
Module Definitions" at http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/bib/vs/Klie05.html.
*	MIB to XML Mapping Tool (MIBDUMP) at
http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/projects/libsmi/xml.html.
*	"Development of SNMP-XML translator and gateway for XML-based
integrated network management" at
http://dpnm.postech.ac.kr/papers/IJNM/03/xml-translator-ijnm03.pdf
<http://dpnm.postech.ac.kr/papers/IJNM/03/xml-translator-ijnm03.pdf> .
*	"Interaction Translation Methods for XML/SNMP Gateway" at
http://dpnm.postech.ac.kr/papers/DSOM/02/xml-snmp-gateway/xml-snmp-gate
way.pdf.

Those resources illustrate that a large chunk of basic MIB to XML
conversion can be specified and automated fairly easily, but some
specific difficulties remain and, it appears, you also have to consider
how certain SNMP aspects will be implemented in the (logical) "gateway"
component.  None of the above work appears to have provided for all
aspects of SMIv2 and SNMPv2c/v3.  MIB2RMDL will have to provide such
coverage.
 
Pending inputs from others on this list, I will start threads on the
major issues left unresolved by that existing body of work in the
coming days.  (The authors of the papers cited above were kind enough
to give me some insights into those issues.)
 
Beyond that existing SNMP MIB to XML oriented work, there are are least
four non-IETF efforts underway to standardize (in the practical sense)
"resource models" for managed entities in the SOA/Web Services
environment:
 
1. Eclipse COSMOS Project, http://www.eclipse.org/cosmos/: "The COSMOS
(COmmunity-driven Systems Management in Open Source) project aims to
provide an extensible, standards-based framework upon which software
developers can create specialized, differentiated and inter-operable
offerings of tools for system management."
 
I strongly recommend starting with the "COSMOS Project Creation Review"
slides at
http://www.eclipse.org/proposals/cosmos/COSMOS%20Project%20Creation%20R
eview-v1.0a.pdf, followed with a more recent set of "COSMOS Demo"
slides from EclipseCON 2007 at 
http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/org.eclipse.cosmos/examples/ec
lipseCon07/org.eclipse.cosmos.examples.eclipsecon07.doc/cosmos-demo-ec0
7.ppt?revision=1.2&root=Technology_Project
<http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/org.eclipse.cosmos/examples/e
clipseCon07/org.eclipse.cosmos.examples.eclipsecon07.doc/cosmos-demo-ec
07.ppt?revision=1.2&root=Technology_Project> .
 
Wrt MIB2RMDL, COSMOS is focused on the Service Modeling Language (SML),
which has recently been submitted as a W3C Draft: "SML is used to model
complex IT services and systems, including their structure,
constraints, policies, and best practices. SML is based on a profile on
XML Schema and Schematron."  As such, SML might provide the
capabilities needed to address most or all of the current MIB to XML
issues referred to above.
 
2. Apache Muse Project, http://ws.apache.org/muse/
<http://ws.apache.org/muse/> .  Apache Muse is "a framework upon which
users can build web service interfaces for manageable resources",
without having to implement all of the "plumbing" described by the the
WS-ResourceFramework (WSRF <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/wsrf>
), WS-BaseNotification (WSN <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/wsn>
), and WS-DistributedManagement (WSDM
<http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/wsdm> ) specifications
standards."
 
Managed resources in Muse are defined in XML/RDF and, therefore, are
somewhat more immediately implementable than the COSMOS SML targets.
The Muse tutorial is available at
http://ws.apache.org/muse/docs/2.2.0/tutorial/index.html
<http://ws.apache.org/muse/docs/2.2.0/tutorial/index.html> .
 
Wrt MIB2RMDL, targeting Muse resources as a first plateau toward
eventual COSMOS SML capabilities might be a good idea.  The COSMOS and
Muse teams have initiated collaboration between those two efforts.
 
3. The Redland Resource Description Framework (RDF) Libraries,
http://librdf.org/ <http://librdf.org/> .  "Redland
<http://librdf.org/>  is a set of free software libraries that provide
support for the Resource Description Framework (RDF)."  It is a set of
"modular, object based <http://librdf.org/docs/api/objects.html>
libraries and APIs for manipulating the RDF graph
<http://librdf.org/docs/api/redland-model.html> , triples
<http://librdf.org/docs/api/redland-statement.html> , URIs and Literals
<http://librdf.org/docs/api/redland-node.html> ."
 
I don't know much about Redland, but it looks like it could be useful
to people implementing eventual MIB2RMDL specifications.
 
4. Last but definitely not least, the Open Grid Forum, www.ogf.org.
OGF members are actually building, deploying, using, and refining open
grid systems using many SOA/WS-oriented standards, technologies, and
practices.  OGF members could provide a very useful living laboratory
for MIB2RMDL capabilities, assuming we produce a good specification via
this effort.  For those not familiar with the OGF, I would recommend
three OFG WGs that appear to have the most relevance to MIB2RMDL (or
vice versa!):

*	Open Grid Services Architecture WG (OGSA-WG),
http://www.ogf.org/gf/group_info/view.php?group=ogsa-wg.
*	Standards development organizations Collaboration on networked
Resources Management (SCRM-WG),
http://www.ogf.org/gf/group_info/view.php?group=scrm-wg
<http://www.ogf.org/gf/group_info/view.php?group=scrm-wg>  and
https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/projects/scrm-wg
<https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/projects/scrm-wg> .
*	OGSA Resource Usage Service WG (RUS-WG),
http://www.ogf.org/gf/group_info/view.php?group=rus-wg
<http://www.ogf.org/gf/group_info/view.php?group=rus-wg>  and
https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/projects/rus-wg
<https://forge.gridforum.org/sf/projects/rus-wg> .

In conclusion, the purpose in identifying the above four non-IETF
groups and recommending close collaboration among individuals from all
five groups is that they provide the SOA/WS management expertise,
implementation vehicles, and real-world applications for rapid up-take
of MIB2RMDL capabilities that should help to propel this work to
completion and industry acceptance.
 
Cheers,
BobN
_______________________________________________
MIB2RDML mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mib2rdml