idnits 2.17.1 draft-gmggm-ccamp-wson-snmp-mib-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document seems to use 'NOT RECOMMENDED' as an RFC 2119 keyword, but does not include the phrase in its RFC 2119 key words list. -- The document date (July 6, 2012) is 4312 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: 'EDITOR NOTE' is mentioned on line 106, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'TEMPLATE TODO' is mentioned on line 160, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'RFC2863' is defined on line 241, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2629' is defined on line 286, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC4181' is defined on line 289, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-10) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te-03 == Outdated reference: A later version (-17) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signal-compatibility-ospf-08 == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-13 -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2629 (Obsoleted by RFC 7749) == Outdated reference: A later version (-24) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-14 Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 11 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Internet Engineering Task Force G. Galimberti, Ed. 3 Internet-Draft G. Martinelli, Ed. 4 Intended status: Standards Track Cisco 5 Expires: January 7, 2013 D. Hiremagalur 6 G. Grammel 7 Juniper 8 July 6, 2012 10 A SNMP MIB to manage GMPLS TED with WSON specific support 11 draft-gmggm-ccamp-wson-snmp-mib-00 13 Abstract 15 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) 16 used by Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) for GMPLS based 17 networks. 19 In particular in the context Wavelength Switching Optical Network 20 (WSON) two sets of information were defined: a general constrains set 21 (reusable by other technologies) and a WSON specific set. This 22 document defines a MIB module for supporting GMPLS WSON specific 23 information. 25 Copyright Notice 27 Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 28 document authors. All rights reserved. 30 Status of this Memo 32 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 33 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 35 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 36 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 37 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 38 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 40 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 41 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 42 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 43 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 45 This Internet-Draft will expire on January 7, 2013. 47 Copyright Notice 48 Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 49 document authors. All rights reserved. 51 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 52 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 53 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 54 publication of this document. Please review these documents 55 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 56 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 57 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 58 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 59 described in the Simplified BSD License. 61 Table of Contents 63 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 64 2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework . . . . . . . . . . 3 65 3. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 66 4. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 67 5. Structure of the MIB Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 68 5.1. tedWsonNodeTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 69 5.1.1. tedWsonResourceBlockInformation . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 70 5.1.2. tedWsonResourcePoolAccessibility . . . . . . . . . . . 4 71 5.1.3. tedWsonResourceBlockWavelengthConstraints . . . . . . . 4 72 5.1.4. tedWsonResourcePoolState . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 73 5.1.5. tedWsonBlockSharedAccessWavelengthAvailability . . . . 4 74 6. Relationship to Other MIB Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 75 6.1. Relationship to the [TEMPLATE TODO] MIB . . . . . . . . . . 4 76 6.2. MIB modules required for IMPORTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 77 7. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 78 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 79 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 80 10. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 81 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 82 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 83 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 84 Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 85 Appendix B. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 86 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 88 1. Introduction 90 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) 91 used by Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) in GMPLS networks. 93 Extentions to current GMPLS to support Wavelength Switched Optical 94 Networks (WSON) [RFC6163] include new objects with specific protocol 95 extentions. Some information where selected as a generic constrains 96 since they could be easily apply to other technologies than WSON. As 97 such this [I-D.ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te] OSPF-TE 98 was proposed and those information will be managed through a 99 separated MIB [ref required]. 101 In case of WSON some technology specific information are required and 102 defined through [I-D.ietf-ccamp-rwa-info] and 103 [I-D.ietf-ccamp-wson-signal-compatibility-ospf]. This MIB module 104 will defines objects related to WSON specific informaton. 106 [EDITOR NOTE] Very early draft to start MIB activity on GMPSL-WSON 107 related extentions and collect feedback from working group. 109 2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework 111 For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current 112 Internet-Standard Management Framework, please refer to section 7 of 113 RFC 3410 [RFC3410]. 115 Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed 116 the Management Information Base or MIB. MIB objects are generally 117 accessed through the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP). 118 Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms defined in the 119 Structure of Management Information (SMI). This memo specifies a MIB 120 module that is compliant to the SMIv2, which is described in STD 58, 121 RFC 2578 [RFC2578], STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58, RFC 2580 122 [RFC2580]. 124 3. Conventions 126 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 127 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 128 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119] In 129 the description of OIDs the convention: Set (S) Get (G) and Trap (T) 130 conventions will describe the action allowed by the paramenter. 132 4. Overview 134 This MIB module should be used in conjunction with 135 [I-D.ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib] since it only defineds additional 136 parmaters to GMPLS TED MIB. 138 5. Structure of the MIB Module 140 5.1. tedWsonNodeTable 142 5.1.1. tedWsonResourceBlockInformation 144 5.1.2. tedWsonResourcePoolAccessibility 146 5.1.3. tedWsonResourceBlockWavelengthConstraints 148 5.1.4. tedWsonResourcePoolState 150 5.1.5. tedWsonBlockSharedAccessWavelengthAvailability 152 6. Relationship to Other MIB Modules 154 6.1. Relationship to the [TEMPLATE TODO] MIB 156 6.2. MIB modules required for IMPORTS 158 7. Definitions 160 [TEMPLATE TODO]: put your valid MIB module here. 161 A list of tools that can help automate the process of 162 checking MIB definitions can be found at 163 http://www.ops.ietf.org/mib-review-tools.html 165 8. Security Considerations 167 There are a number of management objects defined in this MIB module 168 with a MAX-ACCESS clause of read-write and/or read-create. Such 169 objects may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network 170 environments. The support for SET operations in a non-secure 171 environment without proper protection can have a negative effect on 172 network operations. These are the tables and objects and their 173 sensitivity/vulnerability: 175 o 177 Some of the readable objects in this MIB module (i.e., objects with a 178 MAX-ACCESS other than not-accessible) may be considered sensitive or 179 vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus important to 180 control even GET and/or NOTIFY access to these objects and possibly 181 to even encrypt the values of these objects when sending them over 182 the network via SNMP. 184 SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 did not include adequate security. 185 Even if the network itself is secure (for example by using IPsec), 186 even then, there is no control as to who on the secure network is 187 allowed to access and GET/SET (read/change/create/delete) the objects 188 in this MIB module. 190 It is RECOMMENDED that implementers consider the security features as 191 provided by the SNMPv3 framework (see [RFC3410], section 8), 192 including full support for the SNMPv3 cryptographic mechanisms (for 193 authentication and privacy). 195 Further, deployment of SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 is NOT 196 RECOMMENDED. Instead, it is RECOMMENDED to deploy SNMPv3 and to 197 enable cryptographic security. It is then a customer/operator 198 responsibility to ensure that the SNMP entity giving access to an 199 instance of this MIB module is properly configured to give access to 200 the objects only to those principals (users) that have legitimate 201 rights to indeed GET or SET (change/create/delete) them. 203 9. IANA Considerations 205 Option #1: 207 The MIB module in this document uses the following IANA-assigned 208 OBJECT IDENTIFIER values recorded in the SMI Numbers registry: 210 Descriptor OBJECT IDENTIFIER value 211 ---------- ----------------------- 213 sampleMIB { mib-2 XXX } 215 Option #2: 217 Editor's Note (to be removed prior to publication): the IANA is 218 requested to assign a value for "XXX" under the 'mib-2' subtree and 219 to record the assignment in the SMI Numbers registry. When the 220 assignment has been made, the RFC Editor is asked to replace "XXX" 221 (here and in the MIB module) with the assigned value and to remove 222 this note. 224 Note well: prior to official assignment by the IANA, an internet 225 draft MUST use placeholders (such as "XXX" above) rather than actual 226 numbers. See RFC4181 Section 4.5 for an example of how this is done 227 in an internet draft MIB module. 229 Option #3: 231 This memo includes no request to IANA. 233 10. Contributors 235 to be added. 237 11. References 239 11.1. Normative References 241 [RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group 242 MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000. 244 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 245 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 247 [RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J. 248 Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Structure of Management Information 249 Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April 1999. 251 [RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J. 252 Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Textual Conventions for SMIv2", 253 STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999. 255 [RFC2580] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., and J. Schoenwaelder, 256 "Conformance Statements for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, 257 April 1999. 259 [I-D.ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te] 260 Zhang, F., Lee, Y., Han, J., Bernstein, G., and Y. Xu, 261 "OSPF-TE Extensions for General Network Element 262 Constraints", 263 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te-03 264 (work in progress), June 2012. 266 [I-D.ietf-ccamp-wson-signal-compatibility-ospf] 267 Lee, Y. and G. Bernstein, "GMPLS OSPF Enhancement for 268 Signal and Network Element Compatibility for Wavelength 269 Switched Optical Networks", 270 draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-signal-compatibility-ospf-08 (work 271 in progress), April 2012. 273 [I-D.ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib] 274 Miyazawa, M., Otani, T., Kumaki, K., and T. Nadeau, 275 "Traffic Engineering Database Management Information Base 276 in support of MPLS-TE/GMPLS", 277 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-13 (work in progress), 278 May 2012. 280 11.2. Informative References 282 [RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart, 283 "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet- 284 Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, December 2002. 286 [RFC2629] Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629, 287 June 1999. 289 [RFC4181] Heard, C., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of MIB 290 Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, September 2005. 292 [RFC6163] Lee, Y., Bernstein, G., and W. Imajuku, "Framework for 293 GMPLS and Path Computation Element (PCE) Control of 294 Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs)", RFC 6163, 295 April 2011. 297 [I-D.ietf-ccamp-rwa-info] 298 Lee, Y., Bernstein, G., Li, D., and W. Imajuku, "Routing 299 and Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength 300 Switched Optical Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-14 301 (work in progress), March 2012. 303 Appendix A. Change Log 305 This optional section should be removed before the internet draft is 306 submitted to the IESG for publication as an RFC. 308 Note to RFC Editor: please remove this appendix before publication as 309 an RFC. 311 Appendix B. Open Issues 313 Note to RFC Editor: please remove this appendix before publication as 314 an RFC. 316 Authors' Addresses 318 Gabriele M. Galimberti (editor) 319 Cisco 320 Via Philips,12 321 20900 - Monza 322 Italy 324 Phone: +390392091462 325 Email: ggalimbe@cisco.com 327 Giovanni Martinelli (editor) 328 Cisco 329 Via Philips,12 330 20900 - Monza 331 Italy 333 Email: giomarti@cisco.com 335 Dharini Hiremagalur 336 Juniper 337 1194 N Mathilda Avenue 338 Sunnyvale - 94089 CA 339 USA 341 Email: dharinih@juniper.net 343 Gert Grammel 344 Juniper 345 1194 N Mathilda Avenue 346 Sunnyvale - 94089 CA 347 USA 349 Email: ggrammel@juniper.net