doc: Add RFC documents

1 files changed, 787 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc1052.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc1052.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..35de17f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc1052.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,787 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group                                            V. Cerf
+Request for Comments: 1052                                           NRI
+                                                              April 1988
+
+               IAB Recommendations for the Development of
+                 Internet Network Management Standards
+
+Status of this Memo
+
+   This memo is intended to convey to the Internet community and other
+   interested parties the recommendations of the Internet Activities
+   Board (IAB) for the development of network management protocols for
+   use in the TCP/IP environment.  The memo does NOT, in and of itself,
+   define or propose an Official Internet Protocol.  It does reflect,
+   however, the policy of the IAB with respect to further network
+   management development in the short and the long term.  Distribution
+   of this memo is unlimited.
+
+Background
+
+   At the IAB meeting on 21 March 88 in videoconference, the report of
+   the Ad Hoc Network Management Review Committee was reviewed.  The
+   recommendations of the committee were endorsed by the IAB and
+   direction given to the chairman of the Internet Engineering Task
+   Force to take the necessary steps to implement the recommendations.
+
+   The IAB expressed its gratitude for the efforts of the HEMS, SNMP and
+   CMIP/CMIS working groups and urged that parties with technical
+   interest in the outcome of the network management working groups
+   convey their ideas and issues to the relevant working group chairmen.
+
+   The IETF chairman was directed to form two new working groups, one of
+   which would be responsible for the further specification and
+   definition of elements to be included in the Management Information
+   Base (MIB).  The other would be responsible for defining extensions
+   to the Simple Network Management Protocol to accommodate the short-
+   term needs of the network vendor and operator communities.  The
+   longer-term needs of the Internet community are to be met using the
+   ISO CMIS/CMIP framework as a basis.  A working group of the IETF
+   exists for this work and would continue its work, coordinating with
+   the two new groups and reporting to the IETF chairman for guidance.
+
+   The output of the MIB working group is to be provided to both the
+   SNMP working group and the CMIS/CMIP ["Netman"] working group so as
+   to assure compatibility of monitored items for both network
+   management frameworks.
+
+
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                            [Page 1]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+Specific Recommendations
+
+   The IAB recommends that the Simple Network Management Protocol be
+   adopted as the BASIS for network management in the short-term.
+   Extensions may be required to the existing SNMP specification to
+   accommodate additional data types or to deal with functional or
+   performance issues arising as multiple SNMP implementations are
+   deployed and applied, especially in multi-vendor applications.
+
+   The SNMP working group constituted by the IETF is charged with
+   considering requirements not met by the present SNMP definition,
+   defining extensions, if necessary, to accommodate these needs, and
+   preparing revisions of the SNMP specifications to address any new
+   extensions.
+
+   The IAB urges the working group to be extremely sensitive to the need
+   to keep SNMP simple, to work quickly to come to concensus on any
+   revisions needed and to promulgate expeditiously the results of its
+   work in one or more RFCs within the next 90 days.  The IETF chairman
+   is responsible for resolving disagreements arising if they cannot be
+   resolved within the working group and is instructed to escalate
+   problems quickly to the IAB should resolution not be forthcoming.
+
+   The IAB further recommends that the MIB working group begin its work
+   equally expeditiously, taking as its starting inputs the MIB
+   definitions found in the existing High-Level Entity Management
+   Systems (HEMS) RFC-1024, the SNMP IDEA-11, and CMIS/CMIP IDEAs.
+
+   It is the intention of the IAB that the MIB definitions be applied
+   both to the SNMP system in the short term and CMIS/CMIP for TCP/IP in
+   the longer term.  The three working groups will have to coordinate
+   their efforts carefully to achieve these objectives:
+
+           1. Rapid convergence and definition for SNMP.
+
+           2. Rapid convergence and definition for the TCP/IP MIB.
+
+           3. Provision for transitioning from SNMP to CMIP/CMIS.
+
+           4. Early demonstration of the CMIP/CMIS capability using the
+              TCP/IP MIB.
+
+   The IAB remains extremely interested in progress towards these goals
+   and intends to have representation, whenever possible, in the various
+   working group and IETF plenary activities.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                            [Page 2]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+         REPORT OF THE AD HOC NETWORK MANAGEMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
+
+                      Edited by Vinton Cerf, Chairman
+
+                                March 1988
+
+EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
+
+   On 29 February 88, an ad hoc committee was convened to review the
+   network management options for the Internet in particular and the
+   TCP/IP protocol suite in general.  This meeting was called at the
+   request of the Internet Activities Board in the course of exercising
+   its responsibilities to the Federal Research Internet Coordinating
+   Council (FRICC) and by the MITRE Corporation as a consequence of its
+   work for the U.S. Air Force on the ULANA project.
+
+   At the conclusion of the one day meeting, it was agreed that the
+   following recommendations be forwarded to the Internet Activities
+   Board chairman, Dr. David C. Clark, for consideration at the next IAB
+   meeting scheduled for 21 March:
+
+      1. In the short term, the Internet community should adopt and
+      adapt the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) for use as the
+      basis of common network management throughout the system.
+
+      (Rationale:  The software is available and in operation.)
+
+      2. In the longer term, the Internet research community and the
+      vendors should develop, deploy and test a network management
+      system based on the International Standards Organization (ISO)
+      Common Management Information Services/Common Management
+      Information Protocol (CMIS/CMIP).
+
+      (Rationale: The Internet community can take the high ground in
+      protocol development by virtue of the experimental environment in
+      which it can operate.  Recommendations to the ISO from this
+      community, the IAB and the vendors will carry great weight if they
+      are in the language of the ISO common network management system
+      and if they are rooted in actual experience with implementation
+      and use in the field.)
+
+      3. Responsibility for the SNMP effort should be placed in the
+      hands of an IETF task force.
+
+      (Rationale:  Eliminate vendor-specific bias or control over the
+      SNMP and its evolution and harmonize inputs from the Internet
+      community.)
+
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                            [Page 3]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+      4. As a high priority effort, define an extended Management
+      Information Base (MIB) for SNMP and TCP/IP CMIP to bring them into
+      closer conformance with the MIB defined for the experimental
+      HighLevel Entity Management System (HEMS).
+
+      (Rationale:  The HEMS effort produced a very thorough and widely-
+      discussed set of elements to monitor, along with definitions of
+      the semantics of these elements.  The current SNMP definitions are
+      more restricted and the CMIP definitions less precise.
+      Implementation of SNMP in a timely and useful fashion through the
+      Internet cannot be satisfactorily completed without such a
+      definition of information elements in hand.)
+
+      The ad hoc committee therefore recommends immediate action by the
+      IAB on all four of these points.  It should be noted that this
+      resolution would not have been possible in such a timely way
+      without the statesman-like efforts of Craig Partridge who, at the
+      end of the day, recommended that the HEMS effort be withdrawn from
+      consideration so as to pave the way for an Internet-wide
+      agreement.  In consideration of this unselfish act, the ad hoc
+      committee urges the IAB to approve the recommendations above and
+      to instruct the IETF to move quickly to accept and act on the SNMP
+      items requiring completion.
+
+1. INTRODUCTION
+
+   During its development history, the community of researchers,
+   developers, implementors and users of the DARPA/DoD TCP/IP protocol
+   suite have experimented with a wide range of protocols in a variety
+   of different networking environments.  The Internet has grown,
+   especially in the last few years, as a result of the widespread
+   availability of software and hardware supporting this system.  The
+   scaling of the size and scope of the Internet and increased use of
+   its technology in commercial applications has underscored for
+   researchers, developers and vendors the need for a common network
+   management framework within which TCP/IP products can be made to
+   work.
+
+   In recognition of this need, several efforts were started to develop
+   network management concepts which might be applied to the Internet
+   and to the internet technology in general.  Three of these efforts
+   had made sufficient progress by the end of 1987 that it became clear
+   that some choices had to be made or the community would find itself
+   with a set of incompatible network management tools.  These efforts
+   included the High-Level Entity Management System (HEMS), the Simple
+   Gateway Monitoring Protocol (SGMP) and the Common Management
+   Information Service/Protocol.
+
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                            [Page 4]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+   The latter is an ISO initiative which was adapted to Internet use in
+   a vendor-initiated effort.  The HEMS work was carried out in the
+   context of the Gateway Monitoring group of the Internet Engineering
+   Task Force.  The SGMP effort was carried out largely in the practical
+   context of the NYSERNET and SURAnet regional networks which needed
+   network management facilities to operate satisfactorily.
+
+   Independent of the general Internet situation and requirements, the
+   U.S.  Air Force has been pursuing a Universal Local Area Network
+   Architecture (ULANA) for its own use. The principal agent for the
+   development of the ULANA specifications is the MITRE Corporation.
+   Faced with several long and short term network management options,
+   the MITRE ULANA specification team initiated an effort with
+   substantial vendor participation called the NETMAN working group.
+
+   It was against this fabric of various options that the IAB appointed
+   a chairman to convene a review committee to discuss these various
+   options and to make recommendations on long and short term choices.
+   The MITRE Corporation co-sponsored this work to further its aims in
+   the specification of the ULANA design.
+
+   Reference material listed at the end of this report was provided in
+   advance of the meeting.
+
+2. DISCUSSION
+
+   Rather than attempting to produce minutes of the meeting, this
+   section summarizes in very high level terms the substance of the
+   discussion which took place during most of the meeting.  Presentation
+   viewgraphs can be made available to IAB/FRICC members interested in
+   their contents.
+
+   The agenda was followed fairly closely with the technical
+   presentations made in the order suggested: HEMS, SGMP, CMIP/CMIS.
+
+   The HEMS effort has established a benchmark for other network
+   management work in the sense that it took a comprehensive conceptual
+   view of the problem and went into considerable detail on the design
+   of the underlying management information database, the mechanics of
+   access to and reporting of information, considerations of scaling and
+   performance (e.g., Query Language vs Remote Procedure Call style),
+   definition of information required and so on.  HEMS has been
+   implemented in an experimental version from which some encouraging
+   performance measurements were taken.  Serious vendor interest in this
+   protocol was expressed by Cisco Systems and implementation efforts
+   were under way as of the meeting.
+
+   The SGMP effort, though somewhat less documented, was rooted in a
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                            [Page 5]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+   practical need for network management tools for the NYSERNET,
+   SURAnet, and, by extension, other components of the Internet.
+   Implementations of it exist, in its RFC-1028 form (probably with some
+   experimental extensions based on experience gained from the initial
+   work), and are in use today.  Serious vendor support for this work is
+   found at Proteon and, more recently, in the NSFNET effort by MERIT,
+   IBM and MCI, specifically in the IBM Network Switching System (NSS)
+   nodes.  Applications running above SGMP exist and provide useful
+   monitoring information, presented in easily grasped form.
+
+   The ISO CMIS/CMIP effort, voluminously documented, has had almost no
+   implementation as yet.  Reports from Unisys/SDC about an experimental
+   implementation were heard at the meeting.  There is substantial
+   momentum in the international community for the adoption of this
+   service and protocol suite for network management.  The Draft
+   Proposal is out for its second ballot (it failed to make Draft
+   International Standard on its first ballot).  There is vocal vendor
+   support for this work, based on the premise that ultimately the ISO
+   protocol suite will propagate and the vendors must support it.
+
+   In general, all of the network management proposals make use of the
+   Abstract Syntax Notation 1 (ASN.1) which has emerged from the ISO
+   efforts as a kind of lingua franca for the representation of
+   arbitrary data structures.  The data types used in the SGMP
+   Management Information Base (aspects of network components to be
+   monitored) are the most restricted of the three proposals, confined
+   to integers and octet strings only.  HEMS has the most extensive
+   Management Information Base and added some rather unique ideas such
+   as self-knowledge about what could be monitored so that a
+   device/unit/component could respond to a query asking "what can you
+   tell me about yourself and your operation and how is it represented?"
+   (!).  CMIS/CMIP is probably the broadest in scope, but less precisely
+   defined at this point, with respect to information which should be
+   monitored.  The draft RFCs referenced above relating to the CMIS/CMIP
+   concerning items to be monitored are still in the definition stages.
+
+   A point made strongly by the HEMS team was their concern that a
+   Remote Operations basis for CMIP may not scale well into a very large
+   Internet which needs to be monitored from a few central sites.
+   Remote Operations is a term used by ISO and means, roughly, what the
+   Internet community has long referred to as Remote Procedure Calls.
+   If each atomic action is a Remote Procedure Call, the HEMS team
+   argues that increasing Internet size and potential delays may vastly
+   constrain the amount and timeliness of information which can be
+   collected.  The HEMS design uses, instead, a general query language
+   approach which permits more elaborate, multi-variable queries to be
+   formulated at the requesting site and processed at the responding
+   site(s).
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                            [Page 6]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+   Although it does substantial injustice to the very lucid and helpful
+   presentations by representatives of each of the network management
+   research groups, I have chosen to leave out much of the detail from
+   this report and move directly to the points of agreement which were
+   reached by the Committee.
+
+3. POINTS OF AGREEMENT
+
+   (i) Future Internet development is a joint interest of the R&D
+   community, the vendor community and the user community.
+
+   [Editor's comment: The development of the Internet is now not only
+   dependent on research work, but on the hardware and software of
+   vendors selling to both commercial ("internet") and the research
+   environment ("Internet").  Moreover, the Internet users are not all
+   concerned with network research; many of the components of the
+   Internet are based on vendor-supplied and supported subsystems.]
+
+   (ii) We still don't have a common understanding of what
+   [Inter]Network Management really is.
+
+   [Editor's comment: We haven't tried to manage the Internet as a
+   collection of autonomous systems in an effective way, yet.]
+
+   (iii) We will learn what [Inter]Network Management is by doing it.
+
+        (a) in as large a scale as is possible
+
+        (b) with as much diversity of implementation as possible
+
+        (c) over as wide a range of protocol layers as possible
+
+        (d) with as much administrative diversity as we can stand.
+
+   (iv) There are more than HEMS, SGMP and CMIS/CMIP as potential
+   candidates:
+
+        HEMS, SGMP, CMIS/CMIP [multiple profiles], NETVIEW,
+        LANMANAGER, Network Computing Forum "Fat Document"...
+
+   [Editor's comment: The multiplicity of options is motivation for
+   coalescing the energy of the Internet environment around single short
+   and long term foci so as to make more substantial progress in really
+   understanding network management per point (iii).]
+
+   (v) Define the Management Information Base for TCP/IP suite NOW!
+
+   (vi) Seek a seat for IETF on ANSI, ISO and/or CCITT!!!
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                            [Page 7]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+   [Editor's comment: This may actually be feasible.]
+
+   (vii) Define a CMIS interface to any of the surviving network
+   management schemes so as to provide a migration path to ISO.
+
+4. RESOLUTION AND CONCLUSIONS
+
+   In a dramatic act of statesmanship, Craig Partridge volunteered that
+   the HEMS proposal be dropped in favor of the other two efforts, SGMP
+   and CMIS/CMIP - IF THIS WOULD LEAD TO INTERNET-WIDE AGREEMENT ON A
+   NETWORK MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE SHORT AND LONG TERM.
+
+   A rationale for the long term was proposed, based on the assumption
+   that the ISO initiatives, and the U.S. Government issuance of the
+   GOSIP guidelines, would ultimately require at least the Government
+   users, and hence their vendor suppliers, to use ISO-based protocols
+   and tools. In this rationale, the Internet research community and its
+   vendors would "take the high ground" in network management by
+   implementing the CMIS/CMIP on top of the TCP/IP protocol suite and
+   deploy it widely for experimental use in the Internet.
+
+   Neither the ISO nor any other organization, including the Corporation
+   for Open Systems (COS) has anything close to the laboratory in large
+   that the Internet represents. By taking the initiative, the Internet
+   working groups can establish credibility based on experience which
+   will make it far more feasible to affect the evolution of the ISO
+   network management and other related efforts. The Internet community
+   will be able to speak with authority about problems with the design
+   or definition of CMIS/CMIP based on real implementation experience
+   and use, rather than solely analytic means.
+
+   In the short term, however, the Internet desperately needs tools to
+   apply to the operational management problems associated with its
+   rapid growth. Given the present state of advanced implementation of
+   the SGMP and its relative simplicity, the general agreement was that
+   SGMP (or its re-named successor, SNMP) should be quickly brought to
+   more complete specification for widespread implementation and use.
+
+   In short, the ad hoc committee recommends:
+
+      1. In the short term, the Internet community should adopt and
+      adapt the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) for use as the
+      basis of common network management throughout the system.
+
+      (Rationale: The software is available and in operation.)
+
+      2. In the longer term, the Internet research community and the
+      vendors should develop, deploy and test a network management
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                            [Page 8]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+      system based on the International Standards Organization (ISO)
+      Common Management Information Services/Common Management
+      Information Protocol (CMIS/CMIP).
+
+      (Rationale: The Internet community can take the high ground in
+      protocol development by virtue of the experimental environment in
+      which it can operate.  Recommendations to the ISO from this
+      community, the IAB and the vendors will carry great weight if they
+      are in the language of the ISO common network management system
+      and if they are rooted in actual experience with implementation
+      and use in the field.)
+
+      3. Responsibility for the SNMP effort should be placed in the
+      hands of an IETF task force.
+
+      (Rationale: Eliminate vendor-specific bias or control over the
+      SNMP and its evolution and harmonize inputs from the Internet
+      community.)
+
+      4. As a high priority effort, define an extended Management
+      Information Base (MIB) for SNMP and TCP/IP CMIP to bring them into
+      closer conformance with the MIB defined for the experimental
+      HighLevel Entity Management System (HEMS).           (Rationale:
+      The HEMS effort produced a very thorough and widely-discussed set
+      of elements to monitor, along with definitions of the semantics of
+      these elements. The current SNMP definitions are more restricted
+      and the CMIP definitions less precise. Implementation of SNMP in a
+      timely and useful fashion through the Internet cannot be
+      satisfactorily completed without such a definition of information
+      elements in hand.)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                            [Page 9]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+MEMBERS OF THE AD HOC NET MANAGEMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
+
+   Amatzia Ben-Artzi
+   Sytek Corp.
+   1225 Charleston Rd.
+   Mountain View, CA 94043
+        Amatzia@amadeus.stanford.edu
+
+   Bob Braden
+   USC-ISI
+   4676 Admiralty Way
+   Marina del Rey, CA 90292
+        braden@isi.edu
+
+   Jeff Case
+   University of Tennessee
+   200 Stokely Management Center
+   Knoxville, TN 37996
+        case@utkcs2.cs.utk.edu
+
+   Vint Cerf - Chairman
+   Corp. for National Research Initiatives
+   1895 Preston White Dr., Suite 100
+   Reston, VA 22091
+       (703) 620-8990
+       Cerf@ISI.EDU
+
+   Chuck Davin
+   Proteon, Inc.
+   2 Technology Dr.
+   Westborough, MA 01536
+       jrd@monk.proteon.com
+
+   Stephen Dunford
+   UNISYS Corp.
+   System Development Corporation
+   5151 Camino Road
+   Camarillo, CA 93010
+        dunford@cam.unisys.com
+
+   Mark Fedor
+   NYSERNET
+   125 Jordan Road
+   Troy, NY 12180
+        fedor@nisc.nyser.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                           [Page 10]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+   Phill Gross - IETF Chairman
+   MITRE Corporation
+   1820 Dolley Madison Blvd.
+   McLean, VA 22012
+        Gross@Gateway.MITRE.Org
+
+   Lee LaBarre
+   MITRE Corporation
+   Burlington Road
+   Bedford, MA 01730
+        cel@mitre-bedford.arpa
+
+   Dan Lynch
+   Advanced Computing Environments
+   480 San Antonio Rd.
+   Mountain View, CA 94040
+        Lynch@isi.edu
+
+   Jim Mathis
+   Apple Computer, Inc.
+   MS 27-0
+   20525 Mariani Ave.
+   Cupertino, CA 95014
+        Mathis@Apple.com
+
+   Craig Partridge
+   BBN Labs
+   10 Moulton St.
+   Cambridge, MA 02238
+       craig@bbn.com
+
+   Marshall T. Rose
+   The Wollongong Group, Inc.
+   1129 San Antonio Road
+   Palo Alto, CA 94043
+        MRose@twg.com
+
+   Greg Satz
+   Cisco Systems
+   1360 Willow Rd., Suite 201
+   Menlo Park, CA 94301
+        satz@cisco.com
+
+   Martin Lee Schoffstall
+   NYSERNET
+   125 Jordan Road
+   Troy, NY 12180
+        schoff@nisc.nyser.net
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                           [Page 11]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+   Glenn Trewitt
+   Center for Integrated Systems, Room 216
+   Stanford University
+   Stanford, CA 94305
+        Trewitt@amadeus.stanford.edu
+
+MEETING LOCATION:  San Diego Supercomputer Center, UC San Diego
+
+LOCAL ARRANGEMENTS:  Paul Love, SDSC
+
+MEETING DATE:  29 February 1988
+
+AGENDA ITEMS:
+
+   0900 Introductions and Objectives/Cerf
+
+   0915 HEMS: Craig Partridge and Glenn Trewitt
+
+   1030 Break
+
+   1045 SGMP - Jeff Case
+
+   1145 CMIP/CMIS - Amatzia Ben-Artzi
+
+   1245 Lunch Break
+
+   1430 TCP/IP and ISO: Politics, Technology, Penetration/Cerf
+
+   1530 Break
+
+   1545 Tradeoffs among alternate paths (Discussion)
+
+   1700 Resolution of alternatives
+
+   1730 Summary of conclusions/actions
+
+   1800 Adjourn
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                           [Page 12]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+REFERENCES
+
+   The following reference material was provided in advance of the
+   meeting.  Note that some of the citations include informal
+   descriptors (such as IDEA numbers or DRAFT letter codes), for
+   example, IDEA-13 or DRAFT-AAAA.  IDEA notes may be updated from time
+   to time reusing the same number.  The IDEA notes are the working
+   notes of the Engineering Task Force.  The DRAFT is a temporary
+   notation and may not be meaningful for more than a few months.
+
+   HEMS
+
+      (1) Craig Partridge, "A UNIX Implementation of HEMS", USENIX,
+      February 1988.  [Available from C. Partridge, BBN Labs]
+
+      (2) Craig Partridge and Glenn Trewitt, "The High-Level Entity
+      Management System", RFC-1021.
+
+      (3) Craig Partridge and Glenn Trewitt, "The High-Level Entity
+      Management Protocol", RFC-1022.
+
+      (4) Glenn Trewitt and Craig Partridge, "The HEMS Monitoring and
+      Control Language", RFC-1023.
+
+      (5) Craig Partridge and Glenn Trewitt, "HEMS Variable
+      Definitions", RFC-1024.
+
+      (6) Craig Partridge and Glenn Trewitt, "The High-Level Entity
+      Management System", IEEE Network magazine, March 1988.
+
+   SGMP/SNMP
+
+      (1) James Davin, Jeff Case, Mark Fedor and Martin Schoffstall, "A
+      Simple Gateway Monitoring Protocol", RFC-1028, November 1987.
+
+      (2) James Davin, Jeff Case, Mark Fedor and Martin Schoffstall, "A
+      Simple Network Management Protocol", IDEA-11, February 1988,
+      obsoletes RFC-1028 when issued.
+
+      (3) Jeffrey R. Case, James R. Davin, Mark S. Fedor, Martin L.
+      Schoffstall, "Introduction to the Simple Gateway Monitoring
+      Protocol", IEEE Network Magazine, March 1988.
+
+   CMIS/CMIP
+
+      (1) Amatzia Ben-Artzi, "Network Management for TCP/IP Network: An
+      Overview", IDEA-12, February 1988.
+
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                           [Page 13]
+
+RFC 1052                  Internet Management                 April 1988
+
+
+      (2) Lee LaBarre, " TCP/IP Network Management Implementors
+      Agreements", IDEA-13, January 1988.
+
+      (3) Lee LaBarre, "Data Link Layer Management Information:
+      MAC802.3", DRAFT-MMMM, February 1988.
+
+      (4) Lee LaBarre, "Network Layer Management Information: IP",
+      DRAFT-NNNN, February 1988.
+
+      (5) Marshall Rose, "ISO Presentation Services on Top of TCP/IP-
+      based Internets", DRAFT-PPPP, February 1988.
+
+      (6) Lee LaBarre, "Structure and Identification of Management
+      Information for the Internet", DRAFT-SMI, February 1988.
+
+      (7) Lee LaBarre, "Transport Layer Management Information: TCP",
+      DRAFT-TTTT, February 1988.
+
+      (8) Lee LaBarre, "Transport Layer Management Information: UDP",
+      DRAFT-UUUU, February 1988.
+
+      (9) ISO/IEC JTC 1/21 N 2058, "2nd DP 9595-1 Information Processing
+      Systems - Open Systems Interconnection - Management Information
+      Service Definition - Part 1: Overview", December 1987.
+
+      (10) ISO/IEC JTC 1/21 N 2059, "2nd DP 9595-2, Information
+      Processing Systems - Open Systems Interconnection - Management
+      Information Service Definition - Part 2: Common Management
+      Information Service Definition", December 1987.
+
+      (11) ISO/IEC JTC 1/21 N 2060, "2nd DP 9596-2, Information
+      Processing Systems - Open Systems Interconnection - Management
+      Information Protocol Specification - Part 2: Common Management
+      Information Protocol", December 1987.
+
+      (12) ISO/TC97/SC21/WG4 N 472, "US Comments on the Proposal for
+      Extension of the Common Management Information Services and
+      Protocol: Creation and Deletion Functions", November 1987.
+
+      (13) JTC1/SC21/WG4 N 482, "Proposal to extend M-Set and M-
+      Confirmed-Set to allow adding and removing values of a multi-
+      valued attribute", November 1987.
+
+      (14) S. Mark Klerer, "The OSI Management Architecture: An
+      Overview", IEEE Network Magazine, March 1988.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Cerf                                                           [Page 14]
+