idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-00.txt: 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: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about 6 months document validity -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 12 longer pages, the longest (page 2) being 61 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.) ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 4 characters in excess of 72. ** The abstract seems to contain references ([TCMIB]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet has text resembling 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 (June 2002) is 7980 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: 'RFC2026' is mentioned on line 26, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'RFC2863' is defined on line 361, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC1213' is defined on line 384, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2514' is defined on line 409, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3031' is defined on line 455, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3032' is defined on line 459, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3034' is defined on line 464, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3035' is defined on line 468, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3036' is defined on line 473, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3209' is defined on line 477, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'CRLDP' is defined on line 482, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'GMPLSSig' is defined on line 493, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'GMPLSCRLDP' is defined on line 506, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'GMPLSRSVPTE' is defined on line 517, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'GMPLSSonetSDH' is defined on line 528, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'GMPLSTEMIB' is defined on line 550, but no explicit reference was found in the text ** Downref: Normative reference to an Historic RFC: RFC 1157 -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'GMPLSArch' -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 1905 (Obsoleted by RFC 3416) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 1906 (Obsoleted by RFC 3417) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2570 (Obsoleted by RFC 3410) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2571 (Obsoleted by RFC 3411) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2572 (Obsoleted by RFC 3412) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2573 (Obsoleted by RFC 3413) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2574 (Obsoleted by RFC 3414) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2575 (Obsoleted by RFC 3415) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 3036 (Obsoleted by RFC 5036) == Outdated reference: A later version (-06) exists of draft-ietf-mpls-cr-ldp-05 Summary: 6 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 20 warnings (==), 12 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Network Working Group Thomas D. Nadeau 2 Internet Draft Cisco Systems, Inc. 3 Expires: December 2002 4 Cheenu Srinivasan 5 Parama Networks, Inc. 7 Adrian Farrel 8 Movaz Networks, Inc. 10 Edward Harrison 11 Tim Hall 12 Data Connection Ltd. 14 June 2002 16 Definition of Textual Conventions and OBJECT-IDENTITIES for 17 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Management 19 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-00.txt 21 Status of this Memo 23 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full 24 conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026 25 [RFC2026]. 27 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet 28 Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working 29 groups. Note that other groups may also distribute 30 working documents as Internet-Drafts. 32 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum 33 of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted 34 by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to 35 use Internet- Drafts as reference material or to cite 36 them other than as "work in progress." 38 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 39 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 41 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be 42 accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 44 Abstract 46 This memo describes Textual Conventions and OBJECT- 47 IDENTITIES common to the Management Information Bases 48 (MIBs) for managing Generalized Multiprotocol Label 49 Switching (GMPLS) networks. 51 It supplements [TCMIB] which describes Textual 52 Conventions and OBJECT-IDENTITIES common to the 53 Management Information Bases (MIBs) for managing 54 Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) networks. 56 Nadeau, et al. [Page 1 ] 57 Table of Contents 59 1. Changes and Pending Work 2 60 1.1. Changes Since the Last Version 2 61 1.2. Pending Work 2 62 2. Introduction 2 63 3. The SNMP Management Framework 3 64 4. GMPLS TC MIB Definitions 4 65 5. Security Considerations 6 66 6. References 7 67 6.1. Normative References 7 68 6.2. Informational References 7 69 7. Authors' Addresses 10 70 8. Full Copyright Statement 11 72 1. Changes and Pending Work 74 This section must be removed before the draft progresses 75 to RFC. 77 1.1. Changes Since the Last Version 79 This is the first version of this draft. 81 1.2. Pending Work 83 - Update reference to latest versions of drafts. 84 - Check compilation of MIB. 86 2. Introduction 88 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information 89 Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in 90 the Internet community. In particular, it defines 91 Textual Conventions used in IETF GMPLS and GMPLS-related 92 MIBs. 94 This document supplements [TCMIB] that defines Textual 95 Conventions and OBJECT-IDENTITIES for Multiprotocol Label 96 Switching (MPLS) Management. [TCMIB] may continue to be 97 used without this MIB in networks that support only MPLS. 99 Comments should be made directly to the CCAMP mailing 100 list at ccamp@ops.ietf.org. 102 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", 103 "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", 104 "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be 106 Nadeau, et al. [Page 2 ] 107 interpreted as described in RFC 2119, reference 108 [RFC2119]. 110 For an introduction to the concepts of GMPLS, see 111 [GMPLSArch]. 113 3. The SNMP Management Framework 115 The SNMP Management Framework presently consists of five 116 major components: 118 - An overall architecture, described in RFC 2571 119 [RFC2571]. 121 - Mechanisms for describing and naming objects and 122 events for the purpose of management. The first 123 version of this Structure of Management Information 124 (SMI) is called SMIv1 and described in STD 16, RFC 125 1155 [RFC1155], STD 16, RFC 1212 [RFC1212] and STD 16, 126 RFC 1215 [RFC1215]. The second version, called SMIv2, 127 is described in STD 58, RFC 2578 [RFC2578], STD 58, 128 RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58, RFC 2580 [RFC2580]. 130 - Message protocols for transferring management 131 information. The first version of the SNMP message 132 protocol is called SNMPv1 and described in STD 15, RFC 133 1157 [RFC1157]. A second version of the SNMP message 134 protocol, which is not an Internet standards track 135 protocol, is called SNMPv2c and described in RFC 1901 136 [RFC1901] and RFC 1906 [RFC1906]. The third version 137 of the message protocol is called SNMPv3 and described 138 in RFC 1906 [RFC1906], RFC 2572 [RFC2572] and RFC 2574 139 [RFC2574]. 141 - Protocol operations for accessing management 142 information. The first set of protocol operations and 143 associated PDU formats is described in STD 15, RFC 144 1157 [RFC1157]. A second set of protocol operations 145 and associated PDU formats is described in RFC 1905 146 [RFC1905]. 148 - A set of fundamental applications described in RFC 149 2573 [RFC2573] and the view-based access control 150 mechanism described in RFC 2575 [RFC2575]. 152 A more detailed introduction to the current SNMP 153 Management Framework can be found in RFC 2570 [RFC2570]. 155 Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information 156 store, termed the Management Information Base or MIB. 157 Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms 158 defined in the SMI. 160 This memo specifies a MIB module that is compliant to the 161 SMIv2. A MIB conforming to the SMIv1 can be produced 163 Nadeau, et al. [Page 3 ] 164 through the appropriate translations. The resulting 165 translated MIB must be semantically equivalent, except 166 where objects or events are omitted because no 167 translation is possible (use of Counter64). Some machine 168 readable information in SMIv2 will be converted into 169 textual descriptions in SMIv1 during the translation 170 process. However, this loss of machine readable 171 information is not considered to change the semantics of 172 the MIB. 174 4. GMPLS TC MIB Definitions 176 GMPLS-TC-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN 178 IMPORTS 179 MODULE-IDENTITY, Unsigned32, Integer32 180 FROM SNMPv2-SMI 181 TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 182 FROM SNMPv2-TC 183 ; 185 gmplsTCMIB MODULE-IDENTITY 186 LAST-UPDATED 187 "200224060900Z" -- 24 June 2002 9:00:00 GMT 188 ORGANIZATION 189 "Common Control And Management Protocols (CCAMP) 190 Working Group" 191 CONTACT-INFO 192 " Thomas D. Nadeau 193 Postal: Cisco Systems, Inc. 194 250 Apollo Drive 195 Chelmsford, MA 01824 196 Tel: +1-978-244-3051 197 Email: tnadeau@cisco.com 199 Cheenu Srinivasan 200 Postal: Parama Networks, Inc. 201 1030 Broad Street 202 Shrewsbury, NJ 07702 203 Tel: +1-732-544-9120 x731 204 Email: cheenu@paramanet.com 205 Tel: +1-732-544-9120x731 207 Adrian Farrel 208 Postal: Movaz Networks, Inc. 209 7926 Jones Branch Drive 210 McLean, VA 22102 211 Tel: +1-703-847-1867 212 Email: afarrel@movaz.com 214 Edward Harrison 215 Postal: Data Connection Ltd. 216 100 Church Street 217 Enfield, Middlesex 218 EN2 6BQ, United Kingdom 220 Nadeau, et al. [Page 4 ] 221 Tel: +44-20-8366-1177 222 Email: eph@dataconnection.com 224 Tim Hall 225 Postal: Data Connection Ltd. 226 100 Church Street 227 Enfield, Middlesex 228 EN2 6BQ, United Kingdom 229 Tel: +44-20-8366-1177 230 Email: timhall@dataconnection.com 232 Email comments to the CCAMP WG Mailing List at 233 ccamp@ops.ietf.org." 235 DESCRIPTION 236 "This MIB module defines Textual Conventions 237 and OBJECT-IDENTITIES for use in documents 238 defining management information bases 239 (MIBs) for managing GMPLS networks." 241 -- Revision history. 242 REVISION 243 "200224060900Z" -- 24 June 2002 09:00:00 GMT 244 DESCRIPTION 245 "Initial version." 246 -- Above revision history to be replaced as below. 247 -- REVISION 248 -- "yyyymmddhhmmZ"-- DESCRIPTION "Initial version, published as RFC xxxx" 249 -- xxxx to be assigned by RFC Editor 250 ::= { gmplsMIB 1 } 252 -- This object identifier needs to be assigned by IANA. 253 -- Note that MPLS has been assigned an ifType of 166 and that an OID 254 -- of 166 has been suggested for the MPLS MIBs. 255 gmplsMIB OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { transmission xxx } 257 -- Textual Conventions (sorted alphabetically). 259 GmplsFreeformLabel ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 260 STATUS current 261 DESCRIPTION 262 "This value represents a freeform 263 generalized MPLS Label. This can be used 264 to represent label types which are not 265 standard in the drafts." 266 SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..64)) 268 GmplsGeneralizedLabelSubtypes ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 269 STATUS current 270 DESCRIPTION 271 "Determines the interpretation that should 272 be applied to a label given its label type 273 as specified by 274 GmplsGeneralizedLabelTypes." 275 SYNTAX INTEGER { 276 mplsLabel(1), 278 Nadeau, et al. [Page 5 ] 279 portWavelengthLabel(2), 280 freeformGeneralizedLabel(3), 281 sonetLabel(4), 282 sdhLabel(5), 283 wavebandLabel(6) 284 } 286 GmplsGeneralizedLabelTypes ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 287 STATUS current 288 DESCRIPTION 289 "The label types that are defined for 290 Generalized MPLS." 291 SYNTAX INTEGER { 292 mplsLabel(1), 293 generalizedLabel(2) 294 } 296 GmplsHopUnnumAddrTypes ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 297 STATUS current 298 DESCRIPTION 299 "Identifies whether a hop of an explicit or 300 reported route uses unnumbered addresses 301 and, if so, the type of unnumbered 302 address." 303 SYNTAX INTEGER { 304 numbered(1), 305 unnumberedIfIpV4(2), 306 unnumberedIfIpV6(3) 307 } 309 GmplsSegmentDirection ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 310 STATUS current 311 DESCRIPTION 312 "The direction of data flow on an LSP 313 segment with respect to the head of the 314 LSP. 316 Where an LSP is signaled using a 317 conventional signaling protocol, the 'head' 318 of the LSP is the source of the signaling 319 (also known as the ingress) and the 'tail' 320 is the destination (also known as the 321 egress). 323 For manually configured LSPs an arbitrary 324 decision must be made about which LER is 325 the 'head'." 326 SYNTAX INTEGER { 327 forward(1), 328 reverse(2) 329 } 331 END 333 Nadeau, et al. [Page 6 ] 334 5. Security Considerations 336 This memo defines textual conventions and object 337 identities for use in GMPLS MIB modules. Security issues 338 for these MIB modules are addressed in the memos defining 339 those modules. 341 6. References 343 6.1. Normative References 345 [RFC1157] Case, J., Fedor, M., Schoffstall, M., and 346 J. Davin, "Simple Network Management 347 Protocol", RFC 1157, May 1990. 349 [RFC1212] Rose, M., and K. McCloghrie, "Concise MIB 350 Definitions", RFC 1212, March 1991. 352 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to 353 Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 354 2119, March 1997. 356 [RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, 357 J., Case, J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, 358 "Textual Conventions for SMIv2", STD 58, 359 RFC 2579, April 1999. 361 [RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholtz, "The 362 Interfaces Group MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000. 364 [GMPLSArch] Ashwood-Smith, P., Awduche, D., Banerjee, 365 A., Basak, D, Berger, L., Bernstein, G., 366 Drake, J., Fan, Y., Fedyk, D., Grammel, D., 367 Kompella, K., Kullberg, A., Lang, J., Liaw, 368 F., Papadimitriou, D., Pendarakis, D., 369 Rajagopalan, B., Rekhter, Y., Saha, D., 370 Sandick, H., Sharma, V., Swallow, G., Tang, 371 Z., Yu, J., Zinin, A., Nadeau, T., Mannie, 372 E., Generalized Multiprotocol Label 373 Switching (GMPLS) Architecture, Internet 374 Draft , March 2001, work in progress. 377 6.2. Informational References 379 [RFC1155] Rose, M., and K. McCloghrie, "Structure and 380 Identification of Management Information 381 for TCP/IP-based Internets", RFC 1155, May 382 1990. 384 [RFC1213] McCloghrie, K, and M. Rose, "Management 385 Information Base for Network Management of 386 TCP/IP Based Internets", RFC 1213, March 388 Nadeau, et al. [Page 7 ] 389 1991. 391 [RFC1215] M. Rose, "A Convention for Defining Traps 392 for use with the SNMP", RFC 1215, March 393 1991. 395 [RFC1901] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M., and S. 396 Waldbusser, "Introduction to Community- 397 based SNMPv2", RFC 1901, January 1996. 399 [RFC1905] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M., and S. 400 Waldbusser, "Protocol Operations for 401 Version 2 of the Simple Network Management 402 Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1905, January 1996. 404 [RFC1906] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M., and S. 405 Waldbusser, "Transport Mappings for Version 406 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol 407 (SNMPv2)", RFC 1906, January 1996. 409 [RFC2514] Noto, et. al., "Definitions of Textual 410 Conventions and OBJECT-IDENTITIES for ATM 411 Management", RFC 2514, Feb. 1999 413 [RFC2570] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. 414 Stewart, "Introduction to Version 3 of the 415 Internet-standard Network Management 416 Framework", RFC 2570, April 1999. 418 [RFC2571] Harrington, D., Presuhn, R., and B. Wijnen, 419 "An Architecture for Describing SNMP 420 Management Frameworks", RFC 2571, April 421 1999. 423 [RFC2572] Case, J., Harrington D., Presuhn R., and B. 424 Wijnen, "Message Processing and Dispatching 425 for the Simple Network Management Protocol 426 (SNMP)", RFC 2572, April 1999. 428 [RFC2573] Levi, D., Meyer, P., and B. Stewart, 429 "SNMPv3 Applications", RFC 2573, April 430 1999. 432 [RFC2574] Blumenthal, U., and B. Wijnen, "User-based 433 Security Model (USM) for version 3 of the 434 Simple Network Management Protocol 435 (SNMPv3)", RFC 2574, April 1999. 437 [RFC2575] Wijnen, B., Presuhn, R., and K. McCloghrie, 438 "View-based Access Control Model (VACM) for 439 the Simple Network Management Protocol 440 (SNMP)", RFC 2575, April 1999. 442 [RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, 443 J., Case, J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, 444 "Structure of Management Information 446 Nadeau, et al. [Page 8 ] 447 Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April 448 1999. 450 [RFC2580] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, 451 J., Case, J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, 452 "Conformance Statements for SMIv2", STD 58, 453 RFC 2580, April 1999. 455 [RFC3031] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., and R. Callon, 456 "Multiprotocol Label Switching 457 Architecture", RFC 3031, August 1999. 459 [RFC3032] Rosen, E., Rekhter, Y., Tappan, D., 460 Farinacci, D., Federokow, G., Li, T., and 461 A. Conta, "MPLS Label Stack Encoding", RFC 462 3032, January 2001. 464 [RFC3034] Conta, A., Doolan, P., Malis, A., "Use of 465 Label Switching on Frame Relay Networks 466 Specification", RFC 3034, January 2001. 468 [RFC3035] Davie, B., Lawrence, J., McCloghrie, K., 469 Rosen, E., Swallow, G., Rekhter, Y., and P. 470 Doolan, "MPLS using LDP and ATM VC 471 switching", RFC 3035, January 2001. 473 [RFC3036] Anderson, L., Doolan, P., Feldman, N., 474 Fredette, A., and B. Thomas, "LDP 475 Specification", RFC 3036, January 2001. 477 [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., 478 Srinivasan, V., and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: 479 Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels", 480 RFC3209, December 2001. 482 [CRLDP] Jamoussi, B., Aboul-Magd, O., Andersson, 483 L., Ashwood-Smith, P., Hellstrand, F., 484 Sundell, K., Callon, R., Dantu, R., Wu, L., 485 Doolan, P., Worster, T., Feldman, N., 486 Fredette, A., Girish, M., Gray, E., 487 Halpern, J., Heinanen, J., Kilty, T., 488 Malis, A., and P. Vaananen, "Constraint- 489 Based LSP Setup using LDP", draft-ietf-mpls- 490 cr-ldp-05.txt, February 2001, work in 491 progress. 493 [GMPLSSig] Ashwood-Smith, P., Awduche, D., Banerjee, 494 A., Basak, D, Berger, L., Bernstein, G., 495 Drake, J., Fan, Y., Fedyk, D., Grammel, D., 496 Kompella, K., Kullberg, A., Lang, 497 Rajagopalan, B., Rekhter, Y., Saha, D., 498 Sharma, V., Swallow, G., Bo Tang, Z., 499 Generalized MPLS - Signaling Functional 500 Description, , May 2001, work in 502 progress. 504 Nadeau, et al. [Page 9 ] 506 [GMPLSCRLDP] Ashwood-Smith, P., Awduche, D., Banerjee, 507 A., Basak, D, Berger, L., Bernstein, G., 508 Drake, J., Fan, Y., Fedyk, D., Grammel, D., 509 Kompella, K., Kullberg, A., Lang, 510 Rajagopalan, B., Rekhter, Y., Saha, D., 511 Sharma, V., Swallow, G., Bo Tang, Z., 512 Generalized MPLS Signaling - CR-LDP 513 Extensions, Internet Draft , May 2001, work 515 in progress. 517 [GMPLSRSVPTE] Ashwood-Smith, P., Awduche, D., Banerjee, 518 A., Basak, D, Berger, L., Bernstein, G., 519 Drake, J., Fan, Y., Fedyk, D., Grammel, D., 520 Kompella, K., Kullberg, A., Lang, 521 Rajagopalan, B., Rekhter, Y., Saha, D., 522 Sharma, V., Swallow, G., Bo Tang, Z., 523 Generalized MPLS Signaling - RSVP-TE 524 Extensions, Internet Draft , May 2001, work 526 in progress. 528 [GMPLSSonetSDH] Mannie, E., Ansorge, S., Ashwood-Smith, 529 P., Banerjee, A., Berger, L., Bernstein, 530 G., Chiu, A., Drake, J., Fan, Y., Fontana, 531 M., Grammel, G., Heiles, J., Katukam, S., 532 Kompella, K., Lang, J. P., Liaw, F., Lin, 533 Z., Mack-Crane, B., Papadimitriou, D., 534 Pendarakis, D., Raftelis, M., Rajagopalan, 535 B., Rekhter, Y., Saha, D., Sharma, V., 536 Swallow, G., Bo Tang, Z., Varma, E., 537 Vissers, M., Xu, Y., GMPLS Extensions for 538 SONET and SDH Control, Internet Draft 539 , 540 May 2001, work in progress. 542 [TCMIB] Nadeau, T., Cucchiara, J., Srinivasan, C, 543 Viswanathan, A. and H. Sjostrand, 544 "Definition of Textual Conventions and 545 OBJECT-IDENTITIES for Multiprotocol Label 546 Switching (MPLS) Management", Internet 547 Draft , 548 January 2002, work in progress. 550 [GMPLSTEMIB] Nadeau, T., Srinivasan, C., Farrel, A., 551 Hall, T., and Harrison, E., "Extensions to 552 the MPLS Traffic Engineering Management 553 Information Base in Support of Generalized 554 Multiprotocol Label Switching", draft- 555 nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-te-mib-01.txt, January 556 2002, work in progress. 558 7. Authors' Addresses 559 Thomas D. Nadeau 560 Cisco Systems, Inc. 561 300 Apollo Drive 562 Chelmsford, MA 01824 563 Phone: +1-978-244-3051 564 Email: tnadeau@cisco.com 566 Cheenu Srinivasan 567 Parama Networks, Inc. 568 1030 Broad Street 569 Shrewsbury, NJ 07702 570 Phone: +1-732-544-9120 x731 571 Email: cheenu@paramanet.com 573 Adrian Farrel 574 Movaz Networks, Inc. 575 7926 Jones Branch Drive, Suite 615 576 McLean VA, 22102USA 577 Phone: +1-703-847-1867 578 Email: afarrel@movaz.com 580 Tim Hall 581 Data Connection Ltd. 582 100 Church Street 583 Enfield, Middlesex 584 EN2 6BQ, UK 585 Phone: +44 20 8366 1177 586 Email: timhall@dataconnection.com 588 Edward Harrison 589 Data Connection Ltd. 590 100 Church Street 591 Enfield, Middlesex 592 EN2 6BQ, UK 593 Phone: +44 20 8366 1177 594 Email: eph@dataconnection.com 596 8. Full Copyright Statement 598 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights 599 Reserved. 601 This document and translations of it may be copied and 602 furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on 603 or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation 604 may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in 605 whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, 606 provided that the above copyright notice and this 607 paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative 608 works. However, this document itself may not be modified 609 in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or 610 references to the Internet Society or other Internet 611 organizations, except as needed for the purpose of 612 developing Internet standards in which case the 613 procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet 614 Standards process must be followed, or as required to 615 translate it into languages other than English. 617 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and 618 will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its 619 successors or assigns. This document and the information 620 contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE 621 INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE 622 DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING 623 BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE 624 INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY 625 IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A 626 PARTICULAR PURPOSE.