| < draft-ietf-ops-rfc3291bis-05.txt | draft-ietf-ops-rfc3291bis-06.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| IPv6 MIB Design Team M. Daniele | Network Working Group M. Daniele | |||
| Internet-Draft Consultant | Internet-Draft Consultant | |||
| Obsoletes: 3291 (if approved) B. Haberman | Obsoletes: 3291 (if approved) B. Haberman | |||
| Expires: December 6, 2004 Caspian Networks | Expires: February 14, 2005 Caspian Networks | |||
| S. Routhier | S. Routhier | |||
| Wind River Systems, Inc. | Wind River Systems, Inc. | |||
| J. Schoenwaelder | J. Schoenwaelder | |||
| International University Bremen | International University Bremen | |||
| June 7, 2004 | August 16, 2004 | |||
| Textual Conventions for Internet Network Addresses | Textual Conventions for Internet Network Addresses | |||
| draft-ietf-ops-rfc3291bis-05.txt | draft-ietf-ops-rfc3291bis-06.txt | |||
| Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
| This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with | By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable | |||
| all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. | patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, | |||
| and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with | ||||
| RFC 3668. | ||||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other | Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | |||
| groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. | other groups may also distribute working documents as | |||
| Internet-Drafts. | ||||
| Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http:// | The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at | |||
| www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. | http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. | |||
| The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | |||
| http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. | http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on December 6, 2004. | This Internet-Draft will expire on February 14, 2005. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. | Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This MIB module defines textual conventions to represent commonly | This MIB module defines textual conventions to represent commonly | |||
| used Internet network layer addressing information. The intent is | used Internet network layer addressing information. The intent is | |||
| that these textual conventions will be imported and used in MIB | that these textual conventions will be imported and used in MIB | |||
| modules that would otherwise define their own representations. | modules that would otherwise define their own representations. | |||
| This document obsoletes RFC 3291. | ||||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 3. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 3. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 4. Usage Hints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 4. Usage Hints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 4.1 Table Indexing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 4.1 Table Indexing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 4.2 Uniqueness of Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 4.2 Uniqueness of Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 4.3 Multiple Addresses per Host . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 4.3 Multiple Addresses per Host . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 4.4 Resolving DNS Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 4.4 Resolving DNS Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 5. Table Indexing Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 5. Table Indexing Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 8. Changes from RFC 3291 to RFC XXXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 9. Changes from RFC 2851 to RFC 3291 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 9. Changes from RFC 3291 to RFC XXXX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 10. Changes from RFC 2851 to RFC 3291 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 10.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 10.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 11.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 11.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | ||||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 22 | Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| Several standard-track MIB modules use the IpAddress SMIv2 base type. | Several standard-track MIB modules use the IpAddress SMIv2 base type. | |||
| This limits the applicability of these MIB modules to IP Version 4 | This limits the applicability of these MIB modules to IP Version 4 | |||
| (IPv4) since the IpAddress SMIv2 base type can only contain 4 byte | (IPv4) since the IpAddress SMIv2 base type can only contain 4 byte | |||
| IPv4 addresses. The IpAddress SMIv2 base type has become problematic | IPv4 addresses. The IpAddress SMIv2 base type has become problematic | |||
| with the introduction of IP Version 6 (IPv6) addresses [RFC3513]. | with the introduction of IP Version 6 (IPv6) addresses [RFC3513]. | |||
| This document defines multiple textual conventions (TCs) as a | This document defines multiple textual conventions (TCs) as a | |||
| mechanism to express generic Internet network layer addresses within | mechanism to express generic Internet network layer addresses within | |||
| MIB module specifications. The solution is compatible with SMIv2 (STD | MIB module specifications. The solution is compatible with SMIv2 | |||
| 58) and SMIv1 (STD 16). New MIB definitions which need to express | (STD 58) and SMIv1 (STD 16). New MIB definitions which need to | |||
| network layer Internet addresses SHOULD use the textual conventions | express network layer Internet addresses SHOULD use the textual | |||
| defined in this memo. New MIB modules SHOULD NOT use the SMIv2 | conventions defined in this memo. New MIB modules SHOULD NOT use the | |||
| IpAddress base type anymore. | SMIv2 IpAddress base type anymore. | |||
| A generic Internet address consists of two objects, one whose syntax | A generic Internet address consists of two objects, one whose syntax | |||
| is InetAddressType, and another whose syntax is InetAddress. The | is InetAddressType, and another whose syntax is InetAddress. The | |||
| value of the first object determines how the value of the second | value of the first object determines how the value of the second | |||
| object is encoded. The InetAddress textual convention represents an | object is encoded. The InetAddress textual convention represents an | |||
| opaque Internet address value. The InetAddressType enumeration is | opaque Internet address value. The InetAddressType enumeration is | |||
| used to "cast" the InetAddress value into a concrete textual | used to "cast" the InetAddress value into a concrete textual | |||
| convention for the address type. This usage of multiple textual | convention for the address type. This usage of multiple textual | |||
| conventions allows expression of the display characteristics of each | conventions allows expression of the display characteristics of each | |||
| address type and makes the set of defined Internet address types | address type and makes the set of defined Internet address types | |||
| extensible. | extensible. | |||
| The textual conventions for well-known transport domains support | The textual conventions for well-known transport domains support | |||
| scoped Internet addresses. The scope of an Internet address is a | scoped Internet addresses. The scope of an Internet address is a | |||
| topological span within which the address may be used as a unique | topological span within which the address may be used as a unique | |||
| identifier for an interface or set of interfaces. A scope zone, or | identifier for an interface or set of interfaces. A scope zone, or | |||
| simply a zone, is a concrete connected region of topology of a given | simply a zone, is a concrete connected region of topology of a given | |||
| scope. Note that a zone is a particular instance of a topological | scope. Note that a zone is a particular instance of a topological | |||
| region, whereas a scope is the size of a topological region | region, whereas a scope is the size of a topological region | |||
| [RFCZZZZ]. Since Internet addresses on devices that connect multiple | [RFCZZZZ]. Since Internet addresses on devices that connect multiple | |||
| zones are not necessarily unique, an additional zone index is needed | zones are not necessarily unique, an additional zone index is needed | |||
| on these devices to select an interface. The textual conventions | on these devices to select an interface. The textual conventions | |||
| InetAddressIPv4z and InetAddressIPv6z are provided to support | InetAddressIPv4z and InetAddressIPv6z are provided to support | |||
| Internet addresses that include a zone index. In order to support | Internet addresses that include a zone index. In order to support | |||
| arbitrary combinations of scoped Internet addresses, MIB authors | arbitrary combinations of scoped Internet addresses, MIB authors | |||
| SHOULD use a separate InetAddressType object for each InetAddress | SHOULD use a separate InetAddressType object for each InetAddress | |||
| object. | object. | |||
| The textual conventions defined in this document can also be used to | The textual conventions defined in this document can also be used to | |||
| represent generic Internet subnets and Internet address ranges. A | represent generic Internet subnets and Internet address ranges. A | |||
| generic Internet subnet is represented by three objects, one whose | generic Internet subnet is represented by three objects, one whose | |||
| syntax is InetAddressType, a second one whose syntax is InetAddress | syntax is InetAddressType, a second one whose syntax is InetAddress | |||
| and a third one whose syntax is InetAddressPrefixLength. The | and a third one whose syntax is InetAddressPrefixLength. The | |||
| InetAddressType value again determines the concrete format of the | InetAddressType value again determines the concrete format of the | |||
| InetAddress value while the InetAddressPrefixLength identifies the | InetAddress value while the InetAddressPrefixLength identifies the | |||
| Internet network address prefix. | Internet network address prefix. | |||
| A generic range of consecutive Internet addresses is represented by | A generic range of consecutive Internet addresses is represented by | |||
| three objects. The first one has the syntax InetAddressType while the | three objects. The first one has the syntax InetAddressType while | |||
| remaining objects have the syntax InetAddress and specify the start | the remaining objects have the syntax InetAddress and specify the | |||
| and end of the address range. The InetAddressType value again | start and end of the address range. The InetAddressType value again | |||
| determines the format of the InetAddress values. | determines the format of the InetAddress values. | |||
| The textual conventions defined in this document can be used to | The textual conventions defined in this document can be used to | |||
| define Internet addresses by using DNS domain names in addition to | define Internet addresses by using DNS domain names in addition to | |||
| IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. A MIB designer can write compliance | IPv4 and IPv6 addresses. A MIB designer can write compliance | |||
| statements to express that only a subset of the possible address | statements to express that only a subset of the possible address | |||
| types must be supported by a compliant implementation. | types must be supported by a compliant implementation. | |||
| MIB developers who need to represent Internet addresses SHOULD use | MIB developers who need to represent Internet addresses SHOULD use | |||
| these definitions whenever applicable, as opposed to defining their | these definitions whenever applicable, as opposed to defining their | |||
| own constructs. Even MIB modules that only need to represent IPv4 or | own constructs. Even MIB modules that only need to represent IPv4 or | |||
| IPv6 addresses SHOULD use the InetAddressType/InetAddress textual | IPv6 addresses SHOULD use the InetAddressType/InetAddress textual | |||
| conventions defined in this memo. | conventions defined in this memo. | |||
| There are many widely deployed MIB modules that use IPv4 addresses | There are many widely deployed MIB modules that use IPv4 addresses | |||
| and which need to be revised to support IPv6. These MIBs can be | and which need to be revised to support IPv6. These MIBs can be | |||
| categorized as follows: | categorized as follows: | |||
| 1. MIB modules which define management information that is in | 1. MIB modules which define management information that is in | |||
| principle IP version neutral, but the MIB currently uses | principle IP version neutral, but the MIB currently uses | |||
| addressing constructs specific to a certain IP version. | addressing constructs specific to a certain IP version. | |||
| 2. MIB modules which define management information that is specific | 2. MIB modules which define management information that is specific | |||
| to particular IP version (either IPv4 or IPv6) and which is very | to particular IP version (either IPv4 or IPv6) and which is very | |||
| unlikely to ever be applicable to another IP version. | unlikely to ever be applicable to another IP version. | |||
| MIB modules of the first type SHOULD provide object definitions | MIB modules of the first type SHOULD provide object definitions | |||
| (e.g., tables) that work with all versions of IP. In particular, when | (e.g., tables) that work with all versions of IP. In particular, | |||
| revising a MIB module which contains IPv4 specific tables, it is | when revising a MIB module which contains IPv4 specific tables, it is | |||
| suggested to define new tables using the textual conventions defined | suggested to define new tables using the textual conventions defined | |||
| in this memo which support all versions of IP. The status of the new | in this memo which support all versions of IP. The status of the new | |||
| tables SHOULD be "current" while the status of the old IP version | tables SHOULD be "current" while the status of the old IP version | |||
| specific tables SHOULD be changed to "deprecated". The other approach | specific tables SHOULD be changed to "deprecated". The other | |||
| of having multiple similar tables for different IP versions is | approach of having multiple similar tables for different IP versions | |||
| strongly discouraged. | is strongly discouraged. | |||
| MIB modules of the second type, which are inherently IP version | MIB modules of the second type, which are inherently IP version | |||
| specific, do not need to be redefined. Note that even in this case, | specific, do not need to be redefined. Note that even in this case, | |||
| any additions to these MIB modules or new IP version specific MIB | any additions to these MIB modules or new IP version specific MIB | |||
| modules SHOULD use the textual conventions defined in this memo. | modules SHOULD use the textual conventions defined in this memo. | |||
| MIB developers SHOULD NOT use the textual conventions defined in this | MIB developers SHOULD NOT use the textual conventions defined in this | |||
| document to represent generic transport layer addresses. A special | document to represent generic transport layer addresses. A special | |||
| set of textual conventions for this purpose is defined in RFC 3419 | set of textual conventions for this purpose is defined in RFC 3419 | |||
| [RFC3419]. | [RFC3419]. | |||
| The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT" and "MAY" in | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT" and "MAY" in | |||
| this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 | this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 | |||
| [RFC2119]. | [RFC2119]. | |||
| 2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework | 2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework | |||
| For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current | For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 38 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 38 ¶ | |||
| 3. Definitions | 3. Definitions | |||
| INET-ADDRESS-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN | INET-ADDRESS-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN | |||
| IMPORTS | IMPORTS | |||
| MODULE-IDENTITY, mib-2, Unsigned32 FROM SNMPv2-SMI | MODULE-IDENTITY, mib-2, Unsigned32 FROM SNMPv2-SMI | |||
| TEXTUAL-CONVENTION FROM SNMPv2-TC; | TEXTUAL-CONVENTION FROM SNMPv2-TC; | |||
| inetAddressMIB MODULE-IDENTITY | inetAddressMIB MODULE-IDENTITY | |||
| LAST-UPDATED "200406040000Z" | LAST-UPDATED "200408110000Z" | |||
| ORGANIZATION | ORGANIZATION | |||
| "IETF Operations and Management Area" | "IETF Operations and Management Area" | |||
| CONTACT-INFO | CONTACT-INFO | |||
| "Juergen Schoenwaelder (Editor) | "Juergen Schoenwaelder (Editor) | |||
| International University Bremen | International University Bremen | |||
| P.O. Box 750 561 | P.O. Box 750 561 | |||
| 28725 Bremen, Germany | 28725 Bremen, Germany | |||
| Phone: +49 421 200-3587 | Phone: +49 421 200-3587 | |||
| EMail: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de | EMail: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de | |||
| skipping to change at page 6, line 14 ¶ | skipping to change at page 6, line 14 ¶ | |||
| representing Internet addresses. An Internet | representing Internet addresses. An Internet | |||
| address can be an IPv4 address, an IPv6 address | address can be an IPv4 address, an IPv6 address | |||
| or a DNS domain name. This module also defines | or a DNS domain name. This module also defines | |||
| textual conventions for Internet port numbers, | textual conventions for Internet port numbers, | |||
| autonomous system numbers and the length of an | autonomous system numbers and the length of an | |||
| Internet address prefix. | Internet address prefix. | |||
| Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This version | Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This version | |||
| of this MIB module is part of RFC XXXX, see the RFC | of this MIB module is part of RFC XXXX, see the RFC | |||
| itself for full legal notices." | itself for full legal notices." | |||
| REVISION "200406040000Z" | REVISION "200408110000Z" | |||
| DESCRIPTION | DESCRIPTION | |||
| "Third version, published as RFC XXXX. This revision | "Third version, published as RFC XXXX. This revision | |||
| introduces the InetZoneIndex, InetScopeType and | introduces the InetZoneIndex, InetScopeType and | |||
| InetVersion textual conventions." | InetVersion textual conventions." | |||
| REVISION "200205090000Z" | REVISION "200205090000Z" | |||
| DESCRIPTION | DESCRIPTION | |||
| "Second version, published as RFC 3291. This | "Second version, published as RFC 3291. This | |||
| revisions contains several clarifications and it | revisions contains several clarifications and it | |||
| introduces several new textual conventions: | introduces several new textual conventions: | |||
| InetAddressPrefixLength, InetPortNumber, | InetAddressPrefixLength, InetPortNumber, | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 13 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 13 ¶ | |||
| specific scope. | specific scope. | |||
| The zone index MUST disambiguate identical address | The zone index MUST disambiguate identical address | |||
| values. For link-local addresses, the zone index will | values. For link-local addresses, the zone index will | |||
| typically be the interface index (ifIndex as defined in the | typically be the interface index (ifIndex as defined in the | |||
| IF-MIB) of the interface on which the address is configured. | IF-MIB) of the interface on which the address is configured. | |||
| The zone index may contain the special value 0 which refers | The zone index may contain the special value 0 which refers | |||
| to the default zone. The default zone may be used in cases | to the default zone. The default zone may be used in cases | |||
| where the valid zone index is not known (e.g., a management | where the valid zone index is not known (e.g., a management | |||
| application needs to write a site-local IPv6 address without | application needs to write a link-local IPv6 address without | |||
| knowing the site index value). The default zone SHOULD NOT be | knowing the interface index value). The default zone SHOULD | |||
| used as an easy way out in cases where the zone index for a | NOT be used as an easy way out in cases where the zone index | |||
| non-global IPv6 address is known." | for a non-global IPv6 address is known." | |||
| REFERENCE "RFCZZZZ" | REFERENCE "RFCZZZZ" | |||
| SYNTAX Unsigned32 | SYNTAX Unsigned32 | |||
| InetVersion ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION | InetVersion ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION | |||
| STATUS current | STATUS current | |||
| DESCRIPTION | DESCRIPTION | |||
| "A value representing a version of the IP protocol. | "A value representing a version of the IP protocol. | |||
| unknown(0) An unknown or unspecified version of the IP | unknown(0) An unknown or unspecified version of the IP | |||
| protocol. | protocol. | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 48 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 48 ¶ | |||
| unknown(0), | unknown(0), | |||
| ipv4(1), | ipv4(1), | |||
| ipv6(2) | ipv6(2) | |||
| } | } | |||
| END | END | |||
| 4. Usage Hints | 4. Usage Hints | |||
| The InetAddressType and InetAddress textual conventions have been | The InetAddressType and InetAddress textual conventions have been | |||
| introduced to avoid over-constraining an object definition by the use | introduced to avoid over-constraining an object definition by the use | |||
| of the IpAddress SMI base type which is IPv4 specific. An | of the IpAddress SMI base type which is IPv4 specific. An | |||
| InetAddressType/InetAddress pair can represent IP addresses in | InetAddressType/InetAddress pair can represent IP addresses in | |||
| various formats. | various formats. | |||
| The InetAddressType and InetAddress objects SHOULD NOT be sub-typed | The InetAddressType and InetAddress objects SHOULD NOT be sub-typed | |||
| in object definitions. Sub-typing binds the MIB module to specific | in object definitions. Sub-typing binds the MIB module to specific | |||
| address formats, which may cause serious problems if new address | address formats, which may cause serious problems if new address | |||
| formats need to be introduced. Note that it is possible to write | formats need to be introduced. Note that it is possible to write | |||
| compliance statements in order to express that only a subset of the | compliance statements in order to express that only a subset of the | |||
| defined address types must be implemented to be compliant. | defined address types must be implemented to be compliant. | |||
| Every usage of the InetAddress or InetAddressPrefixLength textual | Every usage of the InetAddress or InetAddressPrefixLength textual | |||
| conventions must specify which InetAddressType object provides the | conventions must specify which InetAddressType object provides the | |||
| context for the interpretation of the InetAddress or | context for the interpretation of the InetAddress or | |||
| InetAddressPrefixLength textual convention. | InetAddressPrefixLength textual convention. | |||
| It is suggested that the InetAddressType object is logically | It is suggested that the InetAddressType object is logically | |||
| registered before the object(s) which uses the InetAddress or | registered before the object(s) which uses the InetAddress or | |||
| InetAddressPrefixLength textual convention. An InetAddressType object | InetAddressPrefixLength textual convention. An InetAddressType | |||
| is logically registered before an InetAddress or | object is logically registered before an InetAddress or | |||
| InetAddressPrefixLength object if it appears before the InetAddress | InetAddressPrefixLength object if it appears before the InetAddress | |||
| or InetAddressPrefixLength object in the conceptual row (which | or InetAddressPrefixLength object in the conceptual row (which | |||
| includes any index objects). This rule allows programs such as MIB | includes any index objects). This rule allows programs such as MIB | |||
| compilers to identify the InetAddressType of a given InetAddress or | compilers to identify the InetAddressType of a given InetAddress or | |||
| InetAddressPrefixLength object by searching for the InetAddressType | InetAddressPrefixLength object by searching for the InetAddressType | |||
| object which precedes an InetAddress or InetAddressPrefixLength | object which precedes an InetAddress or InetAddressPrefixLength | |||
| object. | object. | |||
| 4.1 Table Indexing | 4.1 Table Indexing | |||
| When a generic Internet address is used as an index, both the | When a generic Internet address is used as an index, both the | |||
| InetAddressType and InetAddress objects MUST be used. The | InetAddressType and InetAddress objects MUST be used. The | |||
| InetAddressType object MUST be listed before the InetAddress object | InetAddressType object MUST be listed before the InetAddress object | |||
| in the INDEX clause. | in the INDEX clause. | |||
| The IMPLIED keyword MUST NOT be used for an object of type | The IMPLIED keyword MUST NOT be used for an object of type | |||
| InetAddress in an INDEX clause. Instance sub-identifiers are then of | InetAddress in an INDEX clause. Instance sub-identifiers are then of | |||
| the form T.N.O1.O2...On, where T is the value of the InetAddressType | the form T.N.O1.O2...On, where T is the value of the InetAddressType | |||
| object, O1...On are the octets in the InetAddress object, and N is | object, O1...On are the octets in the InetAddress object, and N is | |||
| the number of those octets. | the number of those octets. | |||
| There is a meaningful lexicographical ordering to tables indexed in | There is a meaningful lexicographical ordering to tables indexed in | |||
| this fashion. Command generator applications may lookup specific | this fashion. Command generator applications may lookup specific | |||
| addresses of known type and value, issue GetNext requests for | addresses of known type and value, issue GetNext requests for | |||
| addresses of a single type, or issue GetNext requests for a specific | addresses of a single type, or issue GetNext requests for a specific | |||
| type and address prefix. | type and address prefix. | |||
| 4.2 Uniqueness of Addresses | 4.2 Uniqueness of Addresses | |||
| IPv4 addresses were intended to be globally unique, current usage | IPv4 addresses were intended to be globally unique, current usage | |||
| notwithstanding. IPv6 addresses were architected to have different | notwithstanding. IPv6 addresses were architected to have different | |||
| scopes and hence uniqueness [RFC3513]. In particular, IPv6 | scopes and hence uniqueness [RFC3513]. In particular, IPv6 | |||
| "link-local" unicast addresses are not guaranteed to be unique on any | "link-local" unicast addresses are not guaranteed to be unique on any | |||
| particular node. In such cases, the duplicate addresses must be | particular node. In such cases, the duplicate addresses must be | |||
| configured on different interfaces. So the combination of an IPv6 | configured on different interfaces. So the combination of an IPv6 | |||
| address and a zone index is unique [RFCZZZZ]. | address and a zone index is unique [RFCZZZZ]. | |||
| The InetAddressIPv6 textual convention has been defined to represent | The InetAddressIPv6 textual convention has been defined to represent | |||
| global IPv6 addresses and non-global IPv6 addresses in cases where no | global IPv6 addresses and non-global IPv6 addresses in cases where no | |||
| zone index is needed (e.g., on end hosts with a single interface). | zone index is needed (e.g., on end hosts with a single interface). | |||
| The InetAddressIPv6z textual convention has been defined to represent | The InetAddressIPv6z textual convention has been defined to represent | |||
| non-global IPv6 addresses in cases where a zone index is needed | non-global IPv6 addresses in cases where a zone index is needed | |||
| (e.g., a router connecting multiple zones). MIB designers who use | (e.g., a router connecting multiple zones). MIB designers who use | |||
| InetAddressType/InetAddress pairs therefore do not need to define | InetAddressType/InetAddress pairs therefore do not need to define | |||
| additional objects in order to support non-global addresses on nodes | additional objects in order to support non-global addresses on nodes | |||
| that connect multiple zones. | that connect multiple zones. | |||
| The InetAddressIPv4z is intended for use in MIBs (like the TCP-MIB) | The InetAddressIPv4z is intended for use in MIBs (like the TCP-MIB) | |||
| which report addresses in the address family used on the wire, but | which report addresses in the address family used on the wire, but | |||
| where the entity instrumented obtains such addresses from | where the entity instrumented obtains such addresses from | |||
| applications or administrators in a form which includes a zone index, | applications or administrators in a form which includes a zone index, | |||
| such as v4-mapped IPv6 addresses. | such as v4-mapped IPv6 addresses. | |||
| The size of the zone index has been chosen so that it is consistent | The size of the zone index has been chosen so that it is consistent | |||
| with (i) the numerical zone index defined in [RFCZZZZ] and (ii) the | with (i) the numerical zone index defined in [RFCZZZZ] and (ii) the | |||
| sin6_scope_id field of the sockaddr_in6 structure defined in RFC 2553 | sin6_scope_id field of the sockaddr_in6 structure defined in RFC 2553 | |||
| [RFC2553]. | [RFC2553]. | |||
| 4.3 Multiple Addresses per Host | 4.3 Multiple Addresses per Host | |||
| A single host system may be configured with multiple addresses (IPv4 | A single host system may be configured with multiple addresses (IPv4 | |||
| or IPv6), and possibly with multiple DNS names. Thus it is possible | or IPv6), and possibly with multiple DNS names. Thus it is possible | |||
| for a single host system to be accessible by multiple | for a single host system to be accessible by multiple | |||
| InetAddressType/InetAddress pairs. | InetAddressType/InetAddress pairs. | |||
| If this could be an implementation or usage issue, the DESCRIPTION | If this could be an implementation or usage issue, the DESCRIPTION | |||
| clause of the relevant objects must fully describe which address is | clause of the relevant objects must fully describe which address is | |||
| reported in a given InetAddressType/InetAddress pair. | reported in a given InetAddressType/InetAddress pair. | |||
| 4.4 Resolving DNS Names | 4.4 Resolving DNS Names | |||
| DNS names MUST be resolved to IP addresses when communication with | DNS names MUST be resolved to IP addresses when communication with | |||
| the named host is required. This raises a temporal aspect to defining | the named host is required. This raises a temporal aspect to | |||
| MIB objects whose value is a DNS name: When is the name translated to | defining MIB objects whose value is a DNS name: When is the name | |||
| an address? | translated to an address? | |||
| For example, consider an object defined to indicate a forwarding | For example, consider an object defined to indicate a forwarding | |||
| destination, and whose value is a DNS name. When does the forwarding | destination, and whose value is a DNS name. When does the forwarding | |||
| entity resolve the DNS name? Each time forwarding occurs or just once | entity resolve the DNS name? Each time forwarding occurs or just once | |||
| when the object was instantiated? | when the object was instantiated? | |||
| The DESCRIPTION clause of such objects SHOULD precisely define how | The DESCRIPTION clause of such objects SHOULD precisely define how | |||
| and when any required name to address resolution is done. | and when any required name to address resolution is done. | |||
| Similarly, the DESCRIPTION clause of such objects SHOULD precisely | Similarly, the DESCRIPTION clause of such objects SHOULD precisely | |||
| define how and when a reverse lookup is being done if an agent has | define how and when a reverse lookup is being done if an agent has | |||
| accessed instrumentation that knows about an IP address and the MIB | accessed instrumentation that knows about an IP address and the MIB | |||
| module or implementation requires it to map the IP address to a DNS | module or implementation requires it to map the IP address to a DNS | |||
| name. | name. | |||
| 5. Table Indexing Example | 5. Table Indexing Example | |||
| This example shows a table listing communication peers that are | This example shows a table listing communication peers that are | |||
| identified by either an IPv4 address, an IPv6 address or a DNS name. | identified by either an IPv4 address, an IPv6 address or a DNS name. | |||
| The table definition also prohibits entries with an empty address | The table definition also prohibits entries with an empty address | |||
| (whose type would be "unknown"). The size of a DNS name is limited to | (whose type would be "unknown"). The size of a DNS name is limited | |||
| 64 characters in order to satisfy OID length constraints. | to 64 characters in order to satisfy OID length constraints. | |||
| peerTable OBJECT-TYPE | peerTable OBJECT-TYPE | |||
| SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF PeerEntry | SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF PeerEntry | |||
| MAX-ACCESS not-accessible | MAX-ACCESS not-accessible | |||
| STATUS current | STATUS current | |||
| DESCRIPTION | DESCRIPTION | |||
| "A list of communication peers." | "A list of communication peers." | |||
| ::= { somewhere 1 } | ::= { somewhere 1 } | |||
| peerEntry OBJECT-TYPE | peerEntry OBJECT-TYPE | |||
| skipping to change at page 17, line 34 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 34 ¶ | |||
| If a row is created by the managed entity itself and | If a row is created by the managed entity itself and | |||
| the address type value is dns(16), then the agent | the address type value is dns(16), then the agent | |||
| stores the IP address internally. A DNS reverse lookup | stores the IP address internally. A DNS reverse lookup | |||
| must be performed on the internally stored IP address | must be performed on the internally stored IP address | |||
| whenever the value is retrieved via SNMP." | whenever the value is retrieved via SNMP." | |||
| ::= { peerEntry 2 } | ::= { peerEntry 2 } | |||
| The following compliance statement specifies that compliant | The following compliance statement specifies that compliant | |||
| implementations need only support IPv4/IPv6 addresses without a zone | implementations need only support IPv4/IPv6 addresses without a zone | |||
| indices. Support for DNS names or IPv4/IPv6 addresses with zone | indices. Support for DNS names or IPv4/IPv6 addresses with zone | |||
| indices is not required. | indices is not required. | |||
| peerCompliance MODULE-COMPLIANCE | peerCompliance MODULE-COMPLIANCE | |||
| STATUS current | STATUS current | |||
| DESCRIPTION | DESCRIPTION | |||
| "The compliance statement of the peer MIB." | "The compliance statement of the peer MIB." | |||
| MODULE -- this module | MODULE -- this module | |||
| MANDATORY-GROUPS { peerGroup } | MANDATORY-GROUPS { peerGroup } | |||
| OBJECT peerAddressType | OBJECT peerAddressType | |||
| SYNTAX InetAddressType { ipv4(1), ipv6(2) } | SYNTAX InetAddressType { ipv4(1), ipv6(2) } | |||
| DESCRIPTION | DESCRIPTION | |||
| "An implementation is only required to support IPv4 | "An implementation is only required to support IPv4 | |||
| and IPv6 addresses without zone indices." | and IPv6 addresses without zone indices." | |||
| ::= { somewhere 2 } | ::= { somewhere 2 } | |||
| Note that the SMIv2 does not permit inclusion of not-accessible | Note that the SMIv2 does not permit inclusion of not-accessible | |||
| objects in an object group (see section 3.1 in STD 58, RFC 2580 | objects in an object group (see section 3.1 in STD 58, RFC 2580 | |||
| [RFC2580]). It is therefore not possible to formally refine the | [RFC2580]). It is therefore not possible to formally refine the | |||
| syntax of auxiliary objects which are not-accessible. In such a | syntax of auxiliary objects which are not-accessible. In such a | |||
| case, it is suggested to express the refinement informally in the | case, it is suggested to express the refinement informally in the | |||
| DESCRIPTION clause of the MODULE-COMPLIANCE macro invocation. | DESCRIPTION clause of the MODULE-COMPLIANCE macro invocation. | |||
| 6. Security Considerations | 6. Security Considerations | |||
| This module does not define any management objects. Instead, it | This module does not define any management objects. Instead, it | |||
| defines a set of textual conventions which may be used by other MIB | defines a set of textual conventions which may be used by other MIB | |||
| modules to define management objects. | modules to define management objects. | |||
| Meaningful security considerations can only be written in the MIB | Meaningful security considerations can only be written in the MIB | |||
| modules that define management objects. This document has therefore | modules that define management objects. This document has therefore | |||
| no impact on the security of the Internet. | no impact on the security of the Internet. | |||
| 7. Acknowledgments | 7. IANA Considerations | |||
| This document has no actions for IANA. | ||||
| 8. Acknowledgments | ||||
| This document was produced by the Operations and Management Area | This document was produced by the Operations and Management Area | |||
| "IPv6MIB" design team. The authors would like to thank Fred Baker, | "IPv6MIB" design team. The authors would like to thank Fred Baker, | |||
| Randy Bush, Richard Draves, Mark Ellison, Bill Fenner, Jun-ichiro | Randy Bush, Richard Draves, Mark Ellison, Bill Fenner, Jun-ichiro | |||
| Hagino, Mike Heard, Tim Jenkins, Glenn Mansfield, Keith McCloghrie, | Hagino, Mike Heard, Tim Jenkins, Allison Mankin, Glenn Mansfield, | |||
| Thomas Narten, Erik Nordmark, Peder Chr. Norgaard, Randy Presuhn, | Keith McCloghrie, Thomas Narten, Erik Nordmark, Peder Chr. Norgaard, | |||
| Andrew Smith, Dave Thaler, Kenneth White, Bert Wijnen, and Brian Zill | Randy Presuhn, Andrew Smith, Dave Thaler, Kenneth White, Bert Wijnen, | |||
| for their comments and suggestions. | and Brian Zill for their comments and suggestions. | |||
| 8. Changes from RFC 3291 to RFC XXXX | 9. Changes from RFC 3291 to RFC XXXX | |||
| The following changes have been made relative to RFC 3291: | The following changes have been made relative to RFC 3291: | |||
| o Added a range restriction to the InetAddressPrefixLength textual | o Added a range restriction to the InetAddressPrefixLength textual | |||
| convention. | convention. | |||
| o Added new textual conventions InetZoneIndex, InetScopeType and | o Added new textual conventions InetZoneIndex, InetScopeType and | |||
| InetVersion. | InetVersion. | |||
| o Added explicit "d" DISPLAY-HINTs for textual conventions that did | o Added explicit "d" DISPLAY-HINTs for textual conventions that did | |||
| not have them. | not have them. | |||
| o Updated boilerplate text and references. | o Updated boilerplate text and references. | |||
| 9. Changes from RFC 2851 to RFC 3291 | 10. Changes from RFC 2851 to RFC 3291 | |||
| The following changes have been made relative to RFC 2851: | The following changes have been made relative to RFC 2851: | |||
| o Added new textual conventions InetAddressPrefixLength, | o Added new textual conventions InetAddressPrefixLength, | |||
| InetPortNumber, and InetAutonomousSystemNumber. | InetPortNumber, and InetAutonomousSystemNumber. | |||
| o Rewrote the introduction to say clearly that in general, one | o Rewrote the introduction to say clearly that in general, one | |||
| should define MIB tables that work with all versions of IP. The | should define MIB tables that work with all versions of IP. The | |||
| other approach of multiple tables for different IP versions is | other approach of multiple tables for different IP versions is | |||
| strongly discouraged. | strongly discouraged. | |||
| o Added text to the InetAddressType and InetAddress descriptions | o Added text to the InetAddressType and InetAddress descriptions | |||
| which requires that implementations must reject set operations | which requires that implementations must reject set operations | |||
| with an inconsistentValue error if they lead to inconsistencies. | with an inconsistentValue error if they lead to inconsistencies. | |||
| o Removed the strict ordering constraints. Description clauses now | o Removed the strict ordering constraints. Description clauses now | |||
| must explain which InetAddressType object provides the context for | must explain which InetAddressType object provides the context for | |||
| an InetAddress or InetAddressPrefixLength object. | an InetAddress or InetAddressPrefixLength object. | |||
| o Aligned wordings with the IPv6 scoping architecture document. | o Aligned wordings with the IPv6 scoping architecture document. | |||
| o Split the InetAddressIPv6 textual convention into the two textual | o Split the InetAddressIPv6 textual convention into the two textual | |||
| conventions (InetAddressIPv6 and InetAddressIPv6z) and introduced | conventions (InetAddressIPv6 and InetAddressIPv6z) and introduced | |||
| a new textual convention InetAddressIPv4z. Added ipv4z(3) and | a new textual convention InetAddressIPv4z. Added ipv4z(3) and | |||
| ipv6z(4) named numbers to the InetAddressType enumeration. | ipv6z(4) named numbers to the InetAddressType enumeration. | |||
| Motivations for this change: (i) enable the introduction of a | Motivations for this change: (i) enable the introduction of a | |||
| textual conventions for non-global IPv4 addresses, (ii) alignment | textual conventions for non-global IPv4 addresses, (ii) alignment | |||
| with the textual conventions for transport addresses, (iii) | with the textual conventions for transport addresses, (iii) | |||
| simpler compliance statements in cases where support for IPv6 | simpler compliance statements in cases where support for IPv6 | |||
| addresses with zone indices is not required, (iv) simplify | addresses with zone indices is not required, (iv) simplify | |||
| implementations for host systems which will never have to report | implementations for host systems which will never have to report | |||
| zone indices. | zone indices. | |||
| 10. References | 11. References | |||
| 10.1 Normative References | 11.1 Normative References | |||
| [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
| Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | |||
| [RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J., | [RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D. and J. Schoenwaelder, | |||
| Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Structure of Management | "Structure of Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", | |||
| Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April | STD 58, RFC 2578, April 1999. | |||
| 1999. | ||||
| [RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J., | [RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D. and J. Schoenwaelder, "Textual | |||
| Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Textual Conventions for | Conventions for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999. | |||
| SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999. | ||||
| [RFC2580] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J., | [RFC2580] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D. and J. Schoenwaelder, | |||
| Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Conformance Statements for | "Conformance Statements for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, | |||
| SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, April 1999. | April 1999. | |||
| [RFC3513] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "Internet Protocol Version 6 | [RFC3513] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "Internet Protocol Version 6 | |||
| (IPv6) Addressing Architecture", RFC 3513, April 2003. | (IPv6) Addressing Architecture", RFC 3513, April 2003. | |||
| [RFCZZZZ] Deering, S., Haberman, B., Jinmei, T., Nordmark, E., Onoe, | [RFCZZZZ] Deering, S., Haberman, B., Jinmei, T., Nordmark, E. and B. | |||
| A. and B. Zill, "IPv6 Scoped Address Architecture", | Zill, "IPv6 Scoped Address Architecture", | |||
| draft-ietf-ipv6-scoping-arch-00.txt, June 2003. | draft-ietf-ipv6-scoping-arch-01.txt, February 2004. | |||
| 10.2 Informative References | 11.2 Informative References | |||
| [RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D. and B. Stewart, | [RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D. and B. Stewart, | |||
| "Introduction and Applicability Statements for the | "Introduction and Applicability Statements for the | |||
| Internet-Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, | Internet-Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, | |||
| December 2002. | December 2002. | |||
| [RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group | [RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group | |||
| MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000. | MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000. | |||
| [RFC2553] Gilligan, R., Thomson, S., Bound, J. and W. Stevens, | [RFC2553] Gilligan, R., Thomson, S., Bound, J. and W. Stevens, | |||
| skipping to change at page 22, line 8 ¶ | skipping to change at page 22, line 8 ¶ | |||
| P.O. Box 750 561 | P.O. Box 750 561 | |||
| 28725 Bremen | 28725 Bremen | |||
| Germany | Germany | |||
| Phone: +49 421 200-3587 | Phone: +49 421 200-3587 | |||
| EMail: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de | EMail: j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de | |||
| Intellectual Property Statement | Intellectual Property Statement | |||
| The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any | The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any | |||
| intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to | Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to | |||
| pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in | pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in | |||
| this document or the extent to which any license under such rights | this document or the extent to which any license under such rights | |||
| might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it | might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has | |||
| has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the | made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information | |||
| IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and | on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be | |||
| standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of | found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of | ||||
| licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to | Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any | |||
| obtain a general license or permission for the use of such | assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an | |||
| proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can | attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of | |||
| be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. | 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 | The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any | |||
| copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary | copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary | |||
| rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice | rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement | |||
| this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive | this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at | |||
| Director. | ietf-ipr@ietf.org. | |||
| Full Copyright Statement | ||||
| Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. | Disclaimer of Validity | |||
| This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to | This document and the information contained herein are provided on an | |||
| others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it | "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS | |||
| or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published | OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET | |||
| and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any | ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, | |||
| kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are | INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE | |||
| included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this | INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED | |||
| document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing | WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. | |||
| the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other | ||||
| Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of | ||||
| developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for | ||||
| copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be | ||||
| followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than | ||||
| English. | ||||
| The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be | Copyright Statement | |||
| revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees. | ||||
| This document and the information contained herein is provided on an | Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject | |||
| "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING | to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and | |||
| TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING | except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. | |||
| 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. | ||||
| Acknowledgment | Acknowledgment | |||
| Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the | Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the | |||
| Internet Society. | Internet Society. | |||
| End of changes. 78 change blocks. | ||||
| 145 lines changed or deleted | 143 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||