idnits 2.17.00 (12 Aug 2021) /tmp/idnits52642/draft-nadeau-pw-tc-mib-02.txt: ** The Abstract section seems to be numbered Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Looks like you're using RFC 2026 boilerplate. This must be updated to follow RFC 3978/3979, as updated by RFC 4748. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 1 longer page, the longest (page 1) being 60 lines Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** The document seems to lack separate sections for Informative/Normative References. All references will be assumed normative when checking for downward references. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC 2119 boilerplate text. -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (February 2002) is 7393 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Missing Reference: 'PWE3REQ' is mentioned on line 79, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPArch' is mentioned on line 86, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SMIv1' is mentioned on line 91, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv1MIBDef' is mentioned on line 91, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv1Traps' is mentioned on line 91, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SMIv2' is mentioned on line 92, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv2TC' is mentioned on line 93, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv2Conf' is mentioned on line 93, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv1' is mentioned on line 107, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv2c' is mentioned on line 99, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv2TM' is mentioned on line 101, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv3MP' is mentioned on line 101, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv3USM' is mentioned on line 102, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv2PO' is mentioned on line 108, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv3App' is mentioned on line 111, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SNMPv3VACM' is mentioned on line 112, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'RFC2571' is defined on line 279, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC1155' is defined on line 283, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC1212' is defined on line 287, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC1215' is defined on line 290, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2578' is defined on line 293, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2579' is defined on line 298, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2580' is defined on line 302, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC1157' is defined on line 306, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC1901' is defined on line 310, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC1906' is defined on line 314, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2572' is defined on line 319, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2574' is defined on line 324, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC1905' is defined on line 328, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2573' is defined on line 333, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2575' is defined on line 336, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'MPLSArch' is defined on line 345, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'Assigned' is defined on line 349, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'IPSEC' is defined on line 354, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'IFMIB' is defined on line 358, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'ATOMMIBTC' is defined on line 361, but no explicit reference was found in the text -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'PWREQ' -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'PWFRM' ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2571 (Obsoleted by RFC 3411) ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 1215 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Historic RFC: RFC 1157 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Historic RFC: RFC 1901 ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 1906 (Obsoleted by RFC 3417) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2572 (Obsoleted by RFC 3412) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2574 (Obsoleted by RFC 3414) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 1905 (Obsoleted by RFC 3416) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2573 (Obsoleted by RFC 3413) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2575 (Obsoleted by RFC 3415) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2570 (Obsoleted by RFC 3410) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 1700 (ref. 'Assigned') (Obsoleted by RFC 3232) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2401 (ref. 'IPSEC') (Obsoleted by RFC 4301) Summary: 17 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 40 warnings (==), 4 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group Thomas D. Nadeau 3 Internet Draft Cisco Systems, Inc. 4 Expires: August 2002 5 Dave Danenberg 6 Litchfield Communications, Inc. 8 David Zelig 9 Corrigent Systems 11 Andrew G. Malis 12 Vivace Networks, Inc. 14 February 2002 16 Definitions for Textual Conventions and OBJECT-IDENTITIES 17 for Pseudo-Wires Management 19 draft-nadeau-pw-tc-mib-02.txt 21 Status of this Memo 23 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 24 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 26 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 27 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 28 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 29 Drafts. 31 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 32 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 33 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 34 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 36 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 37 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 39 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 40 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 42 1.0 Abstract 44 This memo describes Textual Conventions and OBJECT-IDENTITIES used 45 for managing Pseudo-Wire services. 47 Table of Contents 49 1.0 Abstract......................................................1 50 2.0 Introduction..................................................2 51 3.0 Terminology...................................................2 52 4.0 The SNMP Management Framework.................................2 53 5.0 PW-TC MIB Definitions.........................................3 54 6.0 Security Considerations.......................................4 55 7.0 References....................................................4 56 8.0 Author's Addresses............................................6 57 9.0 Full Copyright Statement......................................7 59 2.0 Introduction 61 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) 62 for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. 63 In particular, it defines Textual Conventions used in IETF PW and PW- 64 related MIBs. 66 Comments should be made directly to the MPLS mailing list at 67 pwe3@ietf.org. 69 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 70 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 71 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [BCP14]. 73 For an introduction to the concepts of Pseudo-Wires, see [PWREQ] and 74 [PWFRM]. 76 3.0 Terminology 78 This document uses terminology from the document describing the 79 Pseudo-Wires Requirements [PWE3REQ]. 81 4.0 The SNMP Management Framework 83 The SNMP Management Framework presently consists of five major 84 components: 86 - An overall architecture, described in RFC 2271 [SNMPArch]. 88 - Mechanisms for describing and naming objects and events for the 89 purpose of management. The first version of this Structure of 90 Management Information (SMI) is called SMIv1 and described in RFC 91 1155 [SMIv1], RFC 1212 [SNMPv1MIBDef] and RFC 1215 [SNMPv1Traps]. 92 The second version, called SMIv2, is described in RFC 1902 [SMIv2], 93 RFC 1903 [SNMPv2TC] and RFC 1904 [SNMPv2Conf]. 95 - Message protocols for transferring management information. The 96 first version of the SNMP message protocol is called SNMPv1 and 97 described in RFC 1157 [SNMPv1]. A second version of the SNMP message 98 protocol, which is not an Internet standards track protocol, is 99 called SNMPv2c and described in RFC 1901 [SNMPv2c] and RFC 1906 100 [SNMPv2TM]. The third version of the message protocol is called 101 SNMPv3 and described in RFC 1906 [SNMPv2TM], RFC 2272 [SNMPv3MP] and 102 RFC 2574 [SNMPv3USM]. 104 - Protocol operations for accessing management information. The 106 first set of protocol operations and associated PDU formats is 107 described in RFC 1157 [SNMPv1]. A second set of protocol operations 108 and associated PDU formats is described in RFC 1905 [SNMPv2PO]. 110 - A set of fundamental applications described in RFC 2273 111 [SNMPv3App] and the view-based access control mechanism described in 112 RFC 2575 [SNMPv3VACM]. 114 A more detailed introduction to the current SNMP Management Framework 115 can be found in RFC 2570 [RFC2570]. 117 Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed 118 the Management Information Base or MIB. Objects in the MIB are 119 defined using the mechanisms defined in the SMI. 121 This memo specifies a MIB module that is compliant to the SMIv2. A 122 MIB conforming to the SMIv1 can be produced through the appropriate 123 translations. The resulting translated MIB must be semantically 124 equivalent, except where objects or events are omitted because no 125 translation is possible (use of Counter64). Some machine readable 126 information in SMIv2 will be converted into textual descriptions in 127 SMIv1 during the translation process. However, this loss of machine 128 readable information is not considered to change the semantics of the 129 MIB. 131 5.0 PW-TC MIB Definitions 133 PW-TC-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN 135 IMPORTS 136 MODULE-IDENTITY, Unsigned32, Integer32, transmission 137 FROM SNMPv2-SMI 139 TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 140 FROM SNMPv2-TC; 142 pwTCMIB MODULE-IDENTITY 143 LAST-UPDATED "200202251200Z" -- 25 February 2002 12:00:00 GMT 144 ORGANIZATION "Pseudo Wire Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3) Working 145 Group" 146 CONTACT-INFO 147 " Thomas D. Nadeau 148 Postal: Cisco Systems, Inc. 149 250 Apollo Drive 150 Chelmsford, MA 01824 151 Tel: +1-978-497-3051 152 Email: tnadeau@cisco.com 153 Dave Danenberg 154 Postal: Litchfield Communications, Inc. 155 76 Westbury Park Rd 156 Princeton Building East 157 Watertown, CT 06795 158 Tel: +1-860-945-1573 x3180 159 Email: dave_danenberg@litchfieldcomm.com 161 David Zelig 162 Postal: Corrigent Systems. 163 126, Yigal Alon St. 164 Tel Aviv, ISRAEL 165 Phone: +972-3-6945273 166 E-mail: davidz@corrigent.com 168 Andrew G. Malis 169 Postal: Vivace Networks, Inc. 170 2730 Orchard Parkway 171 San Jose, CA 95134 172 Email: Andy.Malis@vivacenetworks.com 174 PWE3 Working Group Mailing List: pwe3@ietf.org" 176 DESCRIPTION 177 "This MIB Module provides Textual Conventions 178 and OBJECT-IDENTITY Objects to be used PW services." 180 -- Revision history. 182 REVISION "200201301200Z" -- 30 January 2002 12:00:00 GMT 183 DESCRIPTION "Adding PwVcVlanCfg, PwAddressType and 184 PwOperStatus." 186 REVISION "200112201200Z" -- 20 Dec 2001 12:00:00 GMT 187 DESCRIPTION "Remove PwVcInstance" 189 REVISION "200107121200Z" -- 12 July 2001 12:00:00 GMT 190 DESCRIPTION "Initial version." 192 ::= { pwMIB 1 } -- pwMIB To Be Assigned by IANA 194 pwMIB OBJECT IDENTIFIER 195 ::= { transmission 7777 } -- To be assigned by IANA ?? 197 -- Textual Conventions defined below are organized alphabetically 199 PwGroupID ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 200 STATUS current 201 DESCRIPTION 202 "An administrative identification mechanism for grouping a 203 set of service-specific pseudo-wire services. May only 204 have local significance." 205 SYNTAX Unsigned32 207 PwVcIDType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 208 STATUS current 209 DESCRIPTION 210 "Virtual Circuit Identifier. Uniquely identifies a VC 211 locally. Also uniquely identifies a VC at its end points." 212 SYNTAX Unsigned32 214 PwVcIndexType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 215 STATUS current 216 DESCRIPTION 217 "Virtual Circuit Index. Locally unique index for indexing 218 one of several MIB tables associated with a particular VC." 219 SYNTAX Unsigned32 221 PwVcVlanCfg ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 222 STATUS current 223 DESCRIPTION 224 "VLAN configuration for Ethernet PW. 225 Values between 0 to 4095 indicate the actual VLAN field 226 value. 227 A value of 4096 indicates that the object refer to untagged 228 frames, i.e. frames without 802.1Q field. 229 A value of 4097 indicates that the object is not relevant." 230 SYNTAX Integer32 (0..4097) 232 PwOperStatus ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 233 STATUS current 234 DESCRIPTION 235 "Indicate the operational ststus of the PW VC. 237 - up: Ready to pass packets. 238 - down: If PW signaling has not yet finished, or 239 indications available at the service 240 level indicate that the VC is not 241 passing packets. 242 - testing: If AdminStatus at the VC level is set to 243 test. 244 - dormant: The VC is not available because of the 245 required resources are occupied VC with 246 higher priority VCs . 247 - notPresent: Some component is missing to accomplish 248 the set up of the VC. 249 - lowerLayerDown: The underlying PSN or outer tunnel is not 250 in OperStatus 'up'. 251 " 252 SYNTAX INTEGER { 253 up(1), 254 down(2), 255 testing(3), 256 unknown(4), 257 dormant(5), 258 notPresent(6), 259 lowerLayerDown(7) 260 } 261 END 263 6.0 Security Considerations 265 This memo defines textual conventions and object identities for use 266 in MPLS MIB modules. Security issues for these MIB modules are 267 addressed in the memos defining those modules. 269 7.0 References 271 [PWREQ] Xiao, X., McPherson, D., et al, "Requirements for 272 Pseudo Wire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3)", 273 , May 2001. 275 [PWFRM] Pate et al, "Framework for Pseudo Wire Emulation 276 Edge-to-Edge (PWE3)", , July 2001. 279 [RFC2571] Harrington, D., Presuhn, R., and B. Wijnen, "An 280 Architecture for Describing SNMP Management 281 Frameworks", RFC 2571, April 1999. 283 [RFC1155] Rose, M., and K. McCloghrie, "Structure and 284 Identification of Management Information for 285 TCP/IP-based Internets", STD 16, RFC 1155, May 1990. 287 [RFC1212] Rose, M., and K. McCloghrie, "Concise MIB 288 Definitions", STD 16, RFC 1212, March 1991. 290 [RFC1215] M. Rose, "A Convention for Defining Traps for use 291 with the SNMP", RFC 1215, March 1991. 293 [RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, 294 J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Structure of 295 Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 296 2578, April 1999. 298 [RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, 299 J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Textual Conventions 300 for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999. 302 [RFC2580] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, 303 J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Conformance 304 Statements for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, April 1999. 306 [RFC1157] Case, J., Fedor, M., Schoffstall, M., and J. Davin, 307 "Simple Network Management Protocol", STD 15, RFC 308 1157, May 1990. 310 [RFC1901] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, 311 "Introduction to Community-based SNMPv2", RFC 1901, 312 January 1996. 314 [RFC1906] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, 315 "Transport Mappings for Version 2 of the Simple 316 Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1906, 317 January 1996. 319 [RFC2572] Case, J., Harrington D., Presuhn R., and B. Wijnen, 320 "Message Processing and Dispatching for the Simple 321 Network Management Protocol (SNMP)", RFC 2572, April 322 1999. 324 [RFC2574] Blumenthal, U., and B. Wijnen, "User-based Security 325 Model (USM) for version 3 of the Simple Network 326 Management Protocol (SNMPv3)", RFC 2574, April 1999. 328 [RFC1905] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, 329 "Protocol Operations for Version 2 of the Simple 330 Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1905, 331 January 1996. 333 [RFC2573] Levi, D., Meyer, P., and B. Stewart, "SNMPv3 334 Applications", RFC 2573, April 1999. 336 [RFC2575] Wijnen, B., Presuhn, R., and K. McCloghrie, "View- 337 based Access Control Model (VACM) for the Simple 338 Network Management Protocol (SNMP)", RFC 2575, April 339 1999. 341 [RFC2570] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart, 342 "Introduction to Version 3 of the Internet-standard 343 Network Management Framework", RFC 2570, April 1999. 345 [MPLSArch] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., and R. Callon, 346 "Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture", 347 RFC 3031, August 1999. 349 [Assigned] Reynolds, J., and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", 350 RFC 1700, October 1994. See also: 351 http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/smi- 352 numbers 354 [IPSEC] Kent, S., and Atkinson, R., "Security Architecture 355 for the Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 356 1998. 358 [IFMIB] McCloghrie, K., and F. Kastenholtz, "The Interfaces 359 Group MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000. 361 [ATOMMIBTC] Noto, et. al., "Definitions of Textual Conventions and 362 OBJECT-IDENTITIES for ATM Management", RFC 2514, 363 Feb. 1999 365 [BCP14] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 366 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 368 8.0 Author's Addresses 370 Thomas D. Nadeau 371 Cisco Systems, Inc. 372 250 Apollo Drive 373 Chelmsford, MA 01824 374 Email: tnadeau@cisco.com 376 Dave Danenberg 377 Litchfield Communications, Inc. 378 76 Westbury Park Rd 379 Princeton Building East 380 Watertown, CT 06795 381 Email: dave_danenberg@litchfieldcomm.com 383 David Zelig 384 Corrigent Systems LTD. 385 126, Yigal Alon st. 386 Tel Aviv, ISRAEL 387 Phone: +972-3-6945273 388 Email: davidz@corrigent.com 390 Andrew G. Malis 391 Vivace Networks, Inc. 392 2730 Orchard Parkway 393 San Jose, CA 95134 394 Email: Andy.Malis@vivacenetworks.com 396 9.0 Full Copyright Statement 398 "Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved. This 399 document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to 400 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it 401 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published 402 and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any 403 kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are 404 included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this 405 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing 406 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other 407 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of 408 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for 409 copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be 410 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than 411 English. 413 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be 414 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. 416 This document and the information contained herein is provided on an 417 "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING 418 TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING 419 BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION 420 HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF 421 MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 423 Acknowledgement 425 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the 426 Internet Society.