Subject: Re: [nmrg] MIB<->MOF conversion
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 11:25:15 +0100

>>>>> Dave Thaler (Exchange) writes:

Dave> I've asked around here at Microsoft, and found that we already
Dave> ship a SMI->MOF conversion tool in the WMI SDK which I'm told
Dave> retains all information except for the named nodes (e.g. system
Dave> OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mib-2 1 } ) which do not add to the
Dave> schema.  (WMI is the name of the Windows implementation of CIM.)

Can you find out if there is a specification for this SMI to CIM
mapping?

Dave> Regarding MOF->SMI conversion, there is no current tool we know
Dave> of, but the person I exchanged email with said:

>> a CIM to MIB will work, however the encoding strategy is going to
>> be cumbersome. The bigger problem is the efficient encoding of the
>> operational semantics of WMI and how it maps onto the SNMP
>> protocol.

Yes, mapping CIM methods will be hard without operations in SMIvX.

/js

From: "Dave Thaler (Exchange)" <[email-masked]>
To: "[email-masked]'" <[email-masked]>
Subject: [nmrg] MIB<->MOF conversion
Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:58:35 -0800 
Sender: [email-masked]

>From the Zurich meeting notes:
> An interesting work item might therefore be the mapping between
> CIM and SMIv2 / SMI-ng. Dave will try to find if there is already
> material on that.

I've asked around here at Microsoft, and found that we already
ship a SMI->MOF conversion tool in the WMI SDK which I'm
told retains all information except for the named nodes
(e.g. system OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { mib-2 1 } ) which do not 
add to the schema.  (WMI is the name of the Windows 
implementation of CIM.)

Regarding MOF->SMI conversion, there is no current tool we know
of, but the person I exchanged email with said:
> a CIM to MIB will work, however the encoding strategy is going 
> to be cumbersome. The bigger problem is the efficient encoding 
> of the operational semantics of WMI and how it maps onto the 
> SNMP protocol.

-Dave

Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 16:07:16 +0100
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nmrg] NMRG meeting Washington (46th IETF)
Sender: [email-masked]

Here are some more details concerning the NMRG meeting in
Washington. We actually managed to organize two meeting slots:

(1) The first one is on Sunday evening at 7pm after the IETF
    reception. The meeting room is not yet finalized. We therefore
    plan to meet after the reception at the message board. We will
    leave a message on the board in case someone arrives late.

(2) The second one is on Monday in the room Cabinet from 1:00 pm to
    3:00 pm. This meeting slot conflicts with the following IETF WGs:
    calsch, vpim, dnsind, ospf, ipsec, tsvwg, uswg. We can decide on
    Sunday whether we need this second meeting slot and how we want to
    split things up.

You can find this and some additional information on the NMRG web page
at <URL:http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/projects/nmrg/>.

The meeting will be chaired by David Harrington. (I actually only have
his confirmation for Sunday evening. But we will be flexible anyway.)

Have a nice trip to Washington DC,

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder      Technical University Braunschweig
<[email-masked]>  Dept. Operating Systems & Computer Networks
Phone: +49 531 391 3289    Bueltenweg 74/75, 38106 Braunschweig, Germany
Fax:   +49 531 391 5936    <URL:http://www.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de/~schoenw/>

To: Aiko Pras <[email-masked]>
Cc: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [nmrg] Draft minutes of the IRTF-NMRG meeting
From: Wes Hardaker <[email-masked]>
Organization: U.C.Davis, Information Technology - D.C.A.S.
Date: 01 Nov 1999 14:58:49 -0800
Lines: 13
Sender: [email-masked]

>>>>> On Mon, 25 Oct 1999 21:46:20 +0200, Aiko Pras <[email-masked]> said:

Aiko> - Via email Wes Hardekker promised to implement it in UCD version 4.

FYI, The current CVS snapshot contains TCP support for the manager and
agent (cmd line flag: "-T TCP").  It doesn't handle large fragment
packets yet, however.  I hope to have this fixed by the next release
of the ucd-snmp package (4.1)...

-- 
Wes Hardaker
Distributed Computing Analysis and Support
University of California at Davis

From: Frank Strauss <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked] ("qr su")
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [nmrg] Would you please so kind give me a answer?
Date: 01 Nov 1999 09:40:52 +0100
Lines: 10
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi!

qr> If the langusge XML will become useful, what is the SNMP's future?

This is no NMRG related question. It is of highly sujective value and
cannot be answered in one or two axiomatic sentences. You might
consider to post your question to comp.protocols.snmp or
comp.dcom.net-management.

 Frank