Forwarding and Control Element R. Haas Separation (forces) IBM Internet-Draft April 20, 2006 Expires: October 22, 2006 ForCES MIB draft-ietf-forces-mib-01 Status of this Memo By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on October 22, 2006. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). Abstract This memo defines a Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it defines a MIB for the Forwarding and Control Element Separation (ForCES) Network Element (NE). The ForCES working group is defining a protocol to allow a Control Element (CE) to control the behavior of a Forwarding Element (FE). Haas Expires October 22, 2006 [Page 1] Internet-Draft ForCES MIB April 2006 Table of Contents 1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Design of the ForCES MIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Association State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5. ForCES MIB Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 11 Haas Expires October 22, 2006 [Page 2] Internet-Draft ForCES MIB April 2006 1. Requirements notation The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 2. Introduction The ForCES MIB is a primarily read-only MIB that captures information related to the ForCES protocol ([RFC3654] and [RFC3746]). This includes state information about the associations between CE(s) and FE(s) in the NE. The ForCES MIB does not include information that is specified in other MIBs, such as packet counters for interfaces, etc. More specifically, the information in the ForCES MIB relative to associations includes: o identifiers of the elements in the association, o state of the association, o configuration parameters of the association, and o statistics of the association. 3. Design of the ForCES MIB In an NE composed of one or more FEs and a single CE, the CE is clearly aware of all associations and hence can provide this information in a single ForCES MIB. In contrast, in an NE composed of more than one CE, such association information is distributed and hence more than one ForCES MIB may be necessary, unless this information is aggregated into a single ForCES MIB by some means beyond the scope of this document. Nevertheless, the ForCES MIB design is compatible with both the single-CE and the multiple-CE case. 4. Association State Association state as shown in the MIB is considered from the CE's point of view: Haas Expires October 22, 2006 [Page 3] Internet-Draft ForCES MIB April 2006 o An association is in the DOWN state if the CE has not received any message (heartbeat or other protocol message) from the FE within a given time period or if an Association Teardown message has been sent by the CE. o An association is in the ESTABLISHING state as long as no message has been received from the FE after the CE has sent a positive Association Setup Response message. o An association is in the UP state in all other cases. Note that it is left to the implementers to choose how long entries of associations in the DOWN state remain in the MIB until they are removed, if at all. 5. ForCES MIB Definition For each association identified by the pair CE ID and FE ID, the following information is provided by the MIB: o Current state of the association: * DOWN: the CE(s) indicated by the CE ID and FE(s) indicated by the FE ID are not associated. * ESTABLISHING: transient state until the association has been established. See Section 4 above for details. * UP: the CE(s) indicated by the CE ID and FE(s) indicated by the FE ID are associated. o Time when the association attained the UP state. o Time when the association appeared in the MIB. o Number of transitions to ESTABLISHING state since the association appeared in the MIB. o Number of transitions to UP state since the association appeared in the MIB. o Number of ForCES messages sent/received since the association attained the UP state. FORCES-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN Haas Expires October 22, 2006 [Page 4] Internet-Draft ForCES MIB April 2006 IMPORTS OBJECT-TYPE, MODULE-IDENTITY, Integer32, Counter32, Unsigned32 FROM SNMPv2-SMI TEXTUAL-CONVENTION, RowStatus, TimeInterval, TimeStamp FROM SNMPv2-TC; forcesMIB MODULE-IDENTITY LAST-UPDATED "200604201200Z" -- Apr 20, 2006 ORGANIZATION "Forwarding and Control Element Separation (ForCES) Working Group" CONTACT-INFO "Robert Haas (rha@zurich.ibm.com), IBM" DESCRIPTION "Initial version, published as RFC yyyy. This MIB contains managed object definitions for the ForCES Protocol." -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note ::= { mib-2 XXX } -- RFC Ed.: replace XXX with IANA-assigned number & remove this note --**************************************************************** ForcesID ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The ForCES identifier is a four octet quantity." SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (4)) ForcesAssociationState ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The value down(1) indicates that the current state of the association is down. establishing(2) indicates that the association is in the process of being set up. up(3) indicates that the association is up." SYNTAX INTEGER { down(1), establishing(2), up(3) } forcesAssociations OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { forcesMIB 1 } forcesAssociationTable OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF ForcesAssociationEntry MAX-ACCESS not-accessible Haas Expires October 22, 2006 [Page 5] Internet-Draft ForCES MIB April 2006 STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The (conceptual) table of associations." ::= { forcesAssociations 1 } forcesAssociationEntry OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX ForcesAssociationEntry MAX-ACCESS not-accessible STATUS current DESCRIPTION "A (conceptual) entry for one association." INDEX { forcesAssociationCEID, forcesAssociationFEID } ::= { forcesAssociationTable 1 } ForcesAssociationEntry ::= SEQUENCE { forcesAssociationCEID ForcesID, forcesAssociationFEID ForcesID, forcesAssociationState ForcesAssociationState, forcesAssociationUptime TimeStamp, forcesAssociationCreated TimeStamp, forcesAssociationTransitionsEstablishing Counter32, forcesAssociationTransitionsUp Counter32, forcesAssociationMsgSent Counter32, forcesAssociationMsgReceived Counter32 } forcesAssociationCEID OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX ForcesID MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The ForCES ID of the CE." ::= { forcesAssociationEntry 1 } forcesAssociationFEID OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX ForcesID MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The ForCES ID of the FE." ::= { forcesAssociationEntry 2 } forcesAssociationState OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX ForcesAssociationState MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION Haas Expires October 22, 2006 [Page 6] Internet-Draft ForCES MIB April 2006 "The current operational state of the association described by this row of the table." ::= { forcesAssociationEntry 3 } forcesAssociationUptime OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX TimeStamp MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The time when this association came up." ::= { forcesAssociationEntry 4 } forcesAssociationCreated OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX TimeStamp MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The time when this entry in the table was created for this association." ::= { forcesAssociationEntry 5 } forcesAssociationTransitionsEstablishing OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX Counter32 MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "A counter of how many times this association state changed from down to establishing." ::= { forcesAssociationEntry 6} forcesAssociationTransitionsUp OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX Counter32 MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "A counter of how many times this association state changed from establishing to up." ::= { forcesAssociationEntry 7} forcesAssociationMsgSent OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX Counter32 MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "A counter of how many messages have been sent on this association since it is up." ::= { forcesAssociationEntry 8} Haas Expires October 22, 2006 [Page 7] Internet-Draft ForCES MIB April 2006 forcesAssociationMsgReceived OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX Counter32 MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "A counter of how many messages have been received on this association since it is up." ::= { forcesAssociationEntry 9} END 6. Security Considerations Some of the readable objects in this MIB module may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environment. SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 did not include adequate security. Even if the network itself is secure (for example by using IPSec), even then, there is no control as to who on the secure network is allowed to access and GET/SET (read/change/create/delete) the objects in this MIB module. It is RECOMMENDED that implementers consider the security features as provided by the SNMPv3 framework (see [RFC3410], section 8), including full support for the SNMPv3 cryptographic mechanisms (for authentication and privacy). Further, deployment of SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 is NOT RECOMMENDED. Instead, it is RECOMMENDED to deploy SNMPv3 and to enable cryptographic security. It is then a customer/operator responsibility to ensure that the SNMP entity giving access to an instance of this MIB module is properly configured to give access to the objects only to those principals (users) that have legitimate rights to indeed GET or SET (change/create/delete) them. 7. IANA Considerations IANA will need to assign a number to this MIB. 8. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart, Haas Expires October 22, 2006 [Page 8] Internet-Draft ForCES MIB April 2006 "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet- Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, December 2002. [RFC3654] Khosravi, H. and T. Anderson, "Requirements for Separation of IP Control and Forwarding", RFC 3654, November 2003. [RFC3746] Yang, L., Dantu, R., Anderson, T., and R. Gopal, "Forwarding and Control Element Separation (ForCES) Framework", RFC 3746, April 2004. Haas Expires October 22, 2006 [Page 9] Internet-Draft ForCES MIB April 2006 Author's Address Robert Haas IBM Saeumerstrasse 4 Rueschlikon 8803 CH Email: rha@zurich.ibm.com URI: http://www.zurich.ibm.com/~rha Haas Expires October 22, 2006 [Page 10] Internet-Draft ForCES MIB April 2006 Intellectual Property Statement The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. Disclaimer of Validity This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. Acknowledgment Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. Haas Expires October 22, 2006 [Page 11]