Internet Info 1997 December/Internet_Info_CD-ROM_Walnut_Creek_December_1997.iso/ietf/92nov/emailmgt-minutes-92nov.txt

Text File | 1993-02-17 | 12.0 KB | 382 lines

Editor's Note: Minutes received 12/10/92

CURRENT_MEETING_REPORT_



Reported by Einar Stefferud/NMA

Minutes of the IFIP Electronic Mail Management BOF (EMAILMGT)

Introduction

This was the Second Meeting of the IFIP-EMailMgt Task Group.

The basis for formation of the IFIP-EMailMgt Joint Task Group of IFIP
WG-6.5 and WG-6.6 was reviewed for the benefit of those who were new to
the Group.  A large portion were new, since this meeting drew many IETF
attendees, and the prior meeting was held at OIW in September.

Drawing new participants was one of the primary reasons for organizing
an IFIP-EMailMgt BOF meeting at the IETF, and in this we succeeded!

The basic points covered were that this is an international task Group
that is focused first on pre-standards work, such as requirements
determination and abstract modeling for Electronic Mail Management of
all kinds of interworking Electronic Mail Systems.  The Charter and the
work plan reflect this orientation.

IFIP-EMailMgt plans to call meetings in conjunction with various other
Task Force and Workshop meetings around the world to intersect all
interested segments of the EMail Industry.  In each such meeting, the
EMailMgt attendees will adhere to the meeting rules of their host,
including payment of attendance fees and provision of meeting reports.

An IFIP-EMailMgt meeting may be called by any interested group, in
conjunction with any meeting venue.  It is expected that a report of the
meeting will be prepared and submitted to the host organization, and to
the IFIP-EMailMgt mailing list.  The report may include comments on
IFIP-EMailMgt work in progress, or may include contributions of any
kind, including proposed documents to be progressed for publication as
IFIP-EMailMgt output products.

Outputs from EMailMgt are directed to whomever may be interested in
using them for whatever purposes they may have.

IFIP-EMailMgt accepts support and participation from any source.  Its
meetings are entirely open to anyone with an interest in the issues, as
is its Mailing list <[e-mail]>.  To subscribe, send a
request to:  <[e-mail]>.

According to the Charter, no decisions may be made in any face-to-face
meeting.  All decisions will be made openly in the mailing list, using
consensus measurement techniques.  No specific consensus measurement
tools have been selected for this purpose, but we expect to manage it in
ad hoc ways as we proceed.  Therefore, any meeting can do no more than
prepare contributions and proposals to the EMailMgt mailing list.

                                   1





Meeting Activities

The Charter of the Group was reviewed and a few minor changes were
proposed.  These will be noted in the Charter for review by the mailing
list, along with the process of adoption by the mailing list, which has
not yet occurred.

The goals and work plan were reviewed.  Given that the work is so near
to its beginning, the basic goals (develop requirements, models, and
object definitions) were retained and work commenced.  The objectives of
this meeting were to progress our understanding of the EMailMgt
requirements, and to begin work on development of appropriate models.
These two areas (Requirements and Models) provide the primary focus for
the first phase of our work.

We are not interested in creation of a whole new set of requirements or
models.  Thus, the work consists of collecting and synthesizing from
other work that has been done, or is currently under way.

Some new participants offered to present new work that they are doing,
which appears to offer additional prospectives on the overall picture.

What we seem to be finding so far is that existing EMailMgt requirements
and modeling work fails to include some aspects that other work does
include.  Thus our first finding is that we do indeed have some serious
work to do.

Email Management should be thought of as a special case of management.

Presentation of Drafts Requirement Document

Emily McCoy is the Design Team Leader for a Requirements Document.  She
presented the first draft version.  (EMGT-92-xxxx).

It consisted of a meld of may other documents, which were identified as
sources for each paragraph to facilitate tracing concepts back to their
roots.  Conflicting views were placed in the document to raise
discussion points.  It contained the following sections:


   o General Requirements.
   o Requirements from a system administrator view.
   o User requirements.


It was agreed that attendees would read the document and discuss it the
next day (Thursday, November 19th).

Discussion of Draft Requirements Document

Missing Areas:



                                   2





Inter-Relay Aspects:  There are better versions of Routing management
issues (ISO documents authored by Bob Willmott) from Oslo meeting.
Should reference MHS-DS documents.

Message Stores User Management Privacy Issues:


   o Non-OSI is not clearly stated.

   o Need to make sure that it follows all the flavors and needs of
     Email, but can't be too generic, since that may make it non-usable.

   o An editing group was set up to work with Emily on this document.


Another Review of Requirements Document

Emily explained changes.  Then asked for which items were specific and
which were generic.  It was decided that all items currently in document
were generic!  (surprise).  There was A LOT (read lots) of discussion
when the Group got to users requirement, especially in the area of what
users and customers were.  There seemed to be a need to differentiate
between at least two and potentially three different needs at the user's
level.

Remote Mail Management Issues

Context:  A set of Email Repository Machines.

Using IMAP, a remote mail access protocol, et al.  Management problems
are inherently from the user's perspective.  (See EMGT-92-25 (Remote
email/message MGT). Management includes Boards and News.

Review of Charter

The Group was still having trouble deciding what it is that is
Management and what this Group is responsible for.  How long will
mushiness be there until there is firm ground.  Can there be a goal
(date wise?).  It was decided that what the Group is responsible for
should be dictated by the Charter.

It was agreed that it should indicate target dates for adoption.  Needs
a Glossary of items.  The editor will rework it where needed, for
submission to the mailing list for adoption.

Discussion of Model

Messaging Model:  There are two ends (users in most cases).

Some MTA's are in an environment that is larger than themselves.  Some
are members of other environments.  We will call these environments

                                   3





domains.  There are protocol enclaves which provide services.

A manager is often confused but is the manager of something.  Manager
defines management domain.  Management domain is what a manager manages.
This allows for a manager to manage multiple protocols and platforms in
that domain.

Mail Cache, Mail Drop, Queues and Mail Store environments are important.
POP server, P7

User ----> MD Manager  --------> Service (transport) Manager

This was good model for mail system.

Now what is the model for the manager (how to manage it).


  1. Manager wants end-to-end connectivity.

  2. Message flow.  How do you instrument the flows.  Requirement is to
     understand (structure) of the flow.

  3. Physical resources.


Some diagrams and pictures were drawn, but they are too hard to render
in this report so interested readers are encouraged to join the mailing
list and obtain copies of better developed documents.

Harald agreed to develop a more complete version of the model that took
shape in the meeting, and publish it on the mailing list before the end
of the year.  An initial draft will be available for use at the OIW
meeting, December 15-17, 1992.

Establishment of Model Design Team

Harald will serve as Modeling Design Team leader.

The Modeling Design Team mailing list is <[e-mail]>.  To
subscribe, send a request to:  <[e-mail]>.

Brief Softswitch Model Presentation

Sheryl Namoglu (Softswitch) offered her understanding of EMGT-92-010
diagram on page 5.  Each line below is a different service (or layer).


   o User Services (BBS, news, Order processing, etc)
   o User Management (profile of users, etc)
   o Mail Services (Routing, Doc Conv, naming translation, Security,
     etc)
   o Operating Systems or Transport Service

                                   4





Presentatin of CMU Model

Chris Newman presented the CMU Model.  The Model proposed is from the
manager's view.



   client -------------- direct delivery --------------- client

   client ------------   message store (semi-direct) ----  client

   client -------- mail subscription ---- local gateway ---- client
                                   or global gateway

   Many users --- Bulletin boards (or other such) ---  mail service



Two radical viewpoints:


  1. Elements of management for bb, mail, etc.
  2. Services of mail.


Ad Hoc Editing Group

The Requirements Document was reviewed by (John Hawthorne (Rome Research
Corp.), Emily McCoy (Mitre), Chris Newman (CMU), Ray Freiwirth (RCI)).

The biggest thing that has to be done to the Requirements Document is
folding in other documents.


  1. Mailbased servers document.
  2. Julian's stuff.
  3. Extracted requirements from Ann McLaughlin's MO definitions.
  4. Security management document.


Review of Meeting Progress and Future Work Plans

Set Agenda For OIW Meeting in December.

All work beyond completion of Requirements and Modeling Documents is
generally on hold because it is dependent on these results.  The only
exception is that a lot of work is already under way on Definition of
CMIS Managed Objects and SNMP MIBs.  Thus, current work is organized
around these three foci:


  1. Requirements


                                   5





  2. Models
  3. Object Definitions


Emily's original document is on the net.  A Copy of the new document
will be placed on the net for review by the time of the OIW meeting.

Harald's 1st and 2nd Model Document drafts will be placed on the net in
time for the OIW meeting.

Paul Brusil will be asked to lead an effort to collect Managed Object
and MIB definitions, and then study them to see what can be learned from
them.  With any luck, they will form a useful base for EMailMgt.

Team Leaders:


Emily McCoy      Requirements
Harald Alvestrand   Models
Paul Brusil      MIB & MO Definition Collection
Future Study     Identify Management Functions


OIW Planned Agenda:


   o Administrivia
   o Presentations

      -  Requirements
      -  Model

   o Discussions

      -  Mapping Requirements/MO

   o MO & MIB Collections
   o Management Tools and Management Information


Attendees

Harald Alvestrand        [e-mail]
George Chang             [e-mail]
Daniel Fauvarque         [e-mail]
Ned Freed                [e-mail]
Raphael Freiwirth        [e-mail]
Terry Gray               [e-mail]
Michel Guittet           [e-mail]

                                   6





Alf Hansen               [e-mail]
John Hawthorne           [e-mail]
Barbara Jennings         [e-mail]
Marko Kaittola           [e-mail]
Neil Katin               [e-mail]
Sylvain Langlois         [e-mail]
Edward Levinson          [e-mail]
Bob Lynch                [e-mail]
Emily McCoy              [e-mail]
John Myers               [e-mail]
Sheryl Namoglu           [e-mail]
Chris Newman             [e-mail]
Kary Robertson           [e-mail]
Jim Romaguera            [e-mail]
Jon Saperia              [e-mail]
Michael Sapich           [e-mail]
Richard Schmalgemeier    [e-mail]
Chris Shaw               [e-mail]
John Sherburne           [e-mail]
Einar Stefferud          [e-mail]
Panos-Gavriil Tsigaridas [e-mail]



                                   7