attachment-0001
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I'm probably the worst "minute"
taker but here is what I caught from the conference call. Thanks to all
the participants for your interest in helping work out the initial direction,
goals, requirements etc.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Who was there?</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Harry Lewis</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Cathy Markle</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Ira McDonald</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Gail Songer</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Bob Taylor</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Ted Tronson</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Bill Wagner</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Agenda</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial"> 1. WBMM Objective</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial"> 2. Necessity of new management
Model to replace MIBS</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial"> 3. Management Interface
Client/Monitor Server Architecture using HTTP over port 80</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial"> 4. Need for alignment with
other similar or related activities.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">WBMM Objective</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Question - Extra vs Intra net
operation?</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Agreement - Yes, both are valid
goals. Prefer not to have distinct protocols, operations etc. for outside
vs inside the firewall</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Non-MIB information Model</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Question - Why (Why not) create
new MIBs?</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">"For" MIB - Strong datatyping,
legacy, familiarity</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">"Against" MIB - PSI
experience handling datatyping (just don't redefine NMTOKEN, INTEGER etc.),
Want to manage the enterprise (SNMP, NPAP, CIM etc.), New and different
things to manage (ex. services).</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Agreement - Will need to map Printer
MIB (Fin MIB etc) to whatever model WBMM ends up with, Separate protocol
and operational binding from data model, </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Open - Still not closed on this
topic</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">HTTP over port 80</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Question - IANA port for WBMM</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Agreement - yes... but consider
other bindings (SMTP etc) also</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Alignment</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Question - What activities to
align with</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Agreement - look at RFCs (Ira's
note), Look at IPP requirements for administrative operations, Look at
CIM (who are migrating to SOAP/WSDL)</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Other Discussion</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Firewalls</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Question - How does (outside)
management application initiate a management session (ex. e-mail SOAP message
requesting device to contact manager). </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">WBMM process</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Sequence of activities</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Question - Should we first concentrate
on mapping the Printer MIB to XML (directly) as opposed to starting to
define a new model?</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">Agreement - We should break down
our tasks prior to sequencing them.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">NEXT MEETING </font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial">March 18 4pm-5pm EST.</font>
<br><font size=2 color=blue face="Arial"> </font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">----------------------------------------------
<br>
Harry Lewis <br>
IBM Printing Systems <br>
---------------------------------------------- </font>