Date: Mon, 12 Jun 1995 12:09:40 -0500 (CDT) From: Bill Lidinsky To: "K. Karl Shimada" Cc: "IEEE802.1 Mailer" , Dawn Williams <72630.107@compuserve.com>, "IEEE802 Exec. Mailer" <802exec@nic.hep.net>, Bill Lidinsky Subject: Re: VLAN Ad Hoc Group Karl: I looked over the info that you emailed to me last Friday. since then, I've also received comments from some members of 802.1. As I recall our phone conversation, WRT time to present to 802.1, I will put you on the agenda for Monday afternoon's 802.1 plenary for 1/2 hour. Some members of 802.1 have indicated that they feel that this work should be done in 802.1 in the internetworking task group. That would be decided after your presentations to 802.1. We also discussed 802.1 authorizing a technical tutorial in the evening. I asked you to send me some information about what would be presented --i.e., an extended technical abstract. You will need to send this to me for review before 802.1 would consider sponsoring an evening tutorial. As far as reserving a room for Monday morning, that's up to you. However, I will be in the 802 Exec meeting and many of the members of 802.1 will be in an editorial session on one of our documents. Therefore you may not get much 802.1 participation. It does appear that 802.1 might be a good home for a VLAN standards project, both from an internetworking and also from a management perspective. I will tentatively schedule 1/2 hour Monday afternoon -- probably around 4:30 or 5:00. Please confirm. Bill PS. I'm copying this to the 802.1 and 802.0 mailers; there have been a few queries sent around. +-------------------------------------------------------------+ | Bill Lidinsky 802.1 Chair | | | | Internet: lidinsky@hep.net M/S 368 FCC3E | | Internet: lidinsky@fnal.gov HEPNRC at Fermilab | | Bitnet: lidinsky@fnal P.O. Box 500 | | DECnet: fnal::lidinsky Batavia, IL 60510 | | +1 708 840-8067 (phone) USA | | +1 708 840-8463 (fax) (for parcels: | | Kirk Rd. & Pine St.) | +-------------------------------------------------------------+ On Fri, 9 Jun 1995, K. Karl Shimada wrote: > > Bill, > > Attached below is the idea of the VLAN Ad Hoc Group. It is well backed > by manufacturers and due to the numbers that have expressed interest I > asked Dawn to try to reserve a room for Monday morning so that we > wouldn't have to take up so much of your 802.1 time. Tentatively Dawn > thinks that we could use the 802.14 room in the morning because they > don't plan to meet. I thought that during this time the manufacturers > that were interested could meet together to review a few technical > proposals. The outcome of the morning meeting would be to then forward a > motion requesting our being set up as an informal study?task group. If > we could then meet together with 802.1 for maybe any hour we could then > present the motion. I was hoping that maybe you would have time on your > agenda after the opening plenary Monday afternoon. > > I'm no sure if I'm going about this in the right way and would certainly > appreciate your feedback. Assuming that our motion was approved, an > interim meeting would then be called to solicit additional papers along > with drafting the PAR which would be ready for the November plenary. > > Here's a short description of the ad hoc VLAN group. > > VLAN Ad Hoc Group > > Due to substantial interest on the part of manufacturers and end users > we believe that there is sufficient reason to study the possibility of > developing an IEEE VLAN standard. There are at three currently > identified components of the standard that would be investigated. These > are: > > 1) Tagging frames with VLAN information, > The actual information is to be determined but at a minimum would > include the "number" of the VLAN; > > 2) Describing a method to share VLAN information between network > devices, > This method would allow devices from various manufacturers to receive > VLAN tables and provide updates on VLAN tables. This would allow vendor > interoperability along with providing end-to-end connectivity. > Potentially this information would also be used by an ATM edge device to > map VLAN frames to ATM virtual channels; > > 3) Management objects for a VLAN network, > At a minimum objects would be provided to be able to configure VLAN > workgroups, however, there are many objects that could be created to > allow for more efficient management of a VLAN network taking into > account that a VLAN could cross multiple network devices and even wide- > area links. > > The goal is to develop a standard that would provide end-to-end, vendor- > independent interoperability on the creation, management, and transport > of VLANs. > > A recent survey in Communications Week magazine posed the following > question: "Is having an industry standard right now for implementing > virtual LANs important?" (Communications Week, June 5, 1995, p. 62) > The results were Yes - 79%; No - 21%. Motion to follow from the IEEE Ad > Hoc Group. > > Best Regards, > K. Karl Shimada > (303) 274-6154 - Voice > (303) 274-2044