idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-03.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 the list of Shadow Directories. == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 8 longer pages, the longest (page 5) being 78 lines == It seems as if not all pages are separated by form feeds - found 0 form feeds but 8 pages Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC 2119 boilerplate text. -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (November 2003) is 7465 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) == Unused Reference: 'RFC3471' is defined on line 253, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3031' is defined on line 268, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3209' is defined on line 272, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3212' is defined on line 276, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3472' is defined on line 284, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3473' is defined on line 288, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'GMPLSSonetSDH' is defined on line 291, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'GMPLSLSRMIB' is defined on line 297, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'GMPLSTEMIB' is defined on line 304, but no explicit reference was found in the text -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'GMPLSArch' -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2434 (Obsoleted by RFC 5226) == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-lsr-mib-03 == Outdated reference: A later version (-16) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-te-mib-03 Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 16 warnings (==), 4 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: May 2004 4 Cheenu Srinivasan 5 Bloomberg L.P. 7 Adrian Farrel 8 Old Dog Consulting 10 Tim Hall 11 Ed Harrison 12 Data Connection Ltd. 14 November 2003 16 Definitions of Textual Conventions for Generalized Multi-Protocol 17 Label Switching (GMPLS) Management 19 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-03.txt 21 Status of this Memo 23 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 24 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026. 26 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 27 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 28 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 29 Drafts. 31 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 32 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 33 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 34 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 36 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 37 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 39 Abstract 41 This document defines a Management Information Base (MIB) module 42 which contains Textual Conventions to represent commonly used 43 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) management 44 information. The intent is that these TEXTUAL CONVENTIONS (TCs) will 45 be imported and used in GMPLS related MIB modules that would 46 otherwise define their own representations. 48 Table of Contents 50 1. Introduction 2 51 2. The SNMP Management Framework 2 52 3. GMPLS Textual Conventions MIB Definitions 3 53 4. Security Considerations 5 54 5. IANA Considerations 5 55 6. References 5 56 6.1. Normative References 5 57 6.2. Informational References 6 58 7. Authors' Addresses 7 59 8. Full Copyright Statement 7 60 9. Intellectual Property Notice 8 62 1. Introduction 64 This document defines a MIB module which contains Textual Conventions 65 for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks. 66 These Textual Conventions should be imported by MIB modules which 67 manage GMPLS networks. 69 This MIB module supplements the MIB module in [TCMIB] that defines 70 Textual Conventions for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) 71 Management. [TCMIB] may continue to be used without this MIB module 72 in networks that support only MPLS. 74 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 75 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 76 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 78 Comments should be made directly to the CCAMP mailing list at 79 ccamp@ops.ietf.org. 81 For an introduction to the concepts of GMPLS, see [GMPLSArch]. 83 2. The SNMP Management Framework 85 For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current 86 Internet-Standard Management Framework, please refer to section 7 of 87 RFC 3410 [RFC3410]. 89 Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed 90 the Management Information Base or MIB. MIB objects are generally 91 accessed through the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP). 92 Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms defined in the 93 Structure of Management Information (SMI). This memo specifies a MIB 94 module that is compliant to the SMIv2, which is described in STD 58, 95 RFC 2578 [RFC2578], STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58, RFC 2580 96 [RFC2580]. 98 3. GMPLS Textual Conventions MIB Definitions 100 GMPLS-TC-STD-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN 102 IMPORTS 103 MODULE-IDENTITY 104 FROM SNMPv2-SMI 105 transmission 106 FROM SNMPv2-SMI 107 TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 108 FROM SNMPv2-TC 109 ; 111 gmplsTCStdMIB MODULE-IDENTITY 112 LAST-UPDATED 113 "200310300900Z" -- 30 October 2003 9:00:00 GMT" 114 ORGANIZATION "Common Control And Management Protocols (CCAMP) 115 Working Group" 116 CONTACT-INFO 117 " Thomas D. Nadeau 118 Cisco Systems, Inc. 119 Email: tnadeau@cisco.com 121 Cheenu Srinivasan 122 Bloomberg L.P. 123 Email: cheenu@bloomberg.net 125 Adrian Farrel 126 Old Dog Consulting 127 Email: adrian@olddog.co.uk 129 Ed Harrison 130 Data Connection Ltd. 131 Email: ed.harrison@dataconnection.com 133 Tim Hall 134 Data Connection Ltd. 135 Email: timhall@dataconnection.com 137 Comments about this document should be emailed direct to the 138 CCAMP working group mailing list at ccamp@ops.ietf.org" 139 DESCRIPTION 140 "Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). This version of this 141 MIB module is part of RFCXXX; see the RFC itself for full legal 142 notices. 144 This MIB module defines Textual Conventions for concepts used in 145 Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks." 147 -- Revision history. 148 REVISION 149 "200310300900Z" -- 30 October 2003 09:00:00 GMT 150 DESCRIPTION 151 "Initial version published as part of RFC XXXX." 152 -- Please see the IANA Considerations Section. 153 -- The requested gmplsStdMIB subId is xx, i.e. 154 ::= { gmplsStdMIB xx } 155 gmplsStdMIB OBJECT IDENTIFIER 156 -- This object identifier needs to be assigned by IANA. 157 -- Since mpls has been assigned an ifType of 166 we recommend 158 -- that this OID be 166 as well, i.e. 159 ::= { transmission XXX } 161 -- Textual Conventions (sorted alphabetically). 163 GmplsFreeformLabel ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 164 STATUS current 165 DESCRIPTION 166 "This value represents a freeform generalized MPLS Label. This 167 can be used to represent label types which are not standard 168 in the drafts. It may also be used by systems that do not 169 wish to represent the labels using the specific label types." 170 SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..64)) 172 GmplsGeneralizedLabelTypes ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 173 STATUS current 174 DESCRIPTION 175 "Determines the interpretation that should be applied to a 176 label." 177 SYNTAX INTEGER { 178 gmplsMplsLabel(1), 179 gmplsPortWavelengthLabel(2), 180 gmplsFreeformGeneralizedLabel(3), 181 gmplsSonetLabel(4), 182 gmplsSdhLabel(5), 183 gmplsWavebandLabel(6) 184 } 186 GmplsSegmentDirection ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 187 STATUS current 188 DESCRIPTION 189 "The direction of data flow on an LSP segment with respect to the 190 head of the LSP. 192 Where an LSP is signaled using a conventional signaling 193 protocol, the 'head' of the LSP is the source of the signaling 194 (also known as the ingress) and the 'tail' is the destination 195 (also known as the egress). 197 For manually configured LSPs an arbitrary decision must be made 198 about which LER is the 'head'." 199 SYNTAX INTEGER { 200 forward(1), 201 reverse(2) 202 } 204 END 206 4. Security Considerations 208 This module does not define any management objects. Instead, it 209 defines a set of textual conventions which may be used by other GMPLS 210 MIB modules to define management objects. 212 Meaningful security considerations can only be written in the MIB 213 modules that define management objects. Therefore, this document has 214 no impact on the security of the Internet. 216 5. IANA Considerations 218 IANA is requested to make a MIB OID assignment under the transmission 219 branch, that is, assign the gmplsStdMIB under { transmission 166 }. 221 This sub-id is requested because 166 is the ifType for mpls(166) and 222 is available under transmission. 224 In the future, GMPLS related standards track MIB modules should be 225 rooted under the mplsStdMIB (sic) subtree. IANA is requested to 226 manage that namespace. New assignments can only be made via a 227 Standards Action as specified in [RFC2434]. 229 This document also requests IANA to assign { gmplsStdMIB xx } to the 230 GMPLS-TC-STD-MIB specified in this document. 232 6. References 234 6.1. Normative References 236 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 237 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 239 [RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., 240 Case, J., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Structure of 241 Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, 242 RFC 2578, April 1999. 244 [RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., 245 Case, J., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Textual 246 Conventions for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 247 1999. 249 [RFC2580] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., 250 Case, J., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Conformance 251 Statements for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, April 1999. 253 [RFC3471] Berger, L. (Editor), "Generalized Multi-Protocol 254 Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional 255 Description", RFC 3471, January 2003. 257 [GMPLSArch] Mannie, E. (Editor), "Generalized Multiprotocol 258 Label Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", Internet 259 Draft , May 260 2003, work in progress. 262 6.2. Informational References 264 [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for 265 Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", 266 BCP: 26, RFC 2434, October 1998. 268 [RFC3031] Rosen, E., Viswananthan, A., and R. Callon, 269 Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture", 270 RFC 3031, January 2001. 272 [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., 273 Srinivasan, V., Swallow, G., "RSVP-TE: Extensions to 274 RSVP for LSP Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001. 276 [RFC3212] Jamoussi, B., (editor), et. al. "Constraint-Based 277 LSP Setup using LDP", RFC 3212, January 2002. 279 [RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D. and B. Stewart, 280 "Introduction and Applicability Statements for 281 Internet-Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, 282 December 2002. 284 [RFC3472] Ashwood-Smith, P., Berger, L. (Editors), 285 "Generalized MPLS Signaling - CR-LDP Extensions", 286 RFC 3472, January 2003. 288 [RFC3473] Berger, L. (Editor), "Generalized MPLS Signaling - 289 RSVP-TE Extensions", RFC 3473 January 2003. 291 [GMPLSSonetSDH] Mannie, E., Papadimitriou, D. (Editors), 292 "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 293 Extensions for SONET and SDH Control", Internet 294 Draft , 295 February 2003, work in progress. 297 [GMPLSLSRMIB] Nadeau, T., Srinivasan, C., Farrel, A., Hall, T., 298 and Harrison, E., " Generalized Multiprotocol Label 299 Switching (GMPLS) Label Switching Router (LSR) 300 Management Information Base", draft-ietf-ccamp- 301 gmpls-lsr-mib-03.txt, November 2003, work in 302 progress. 304 [GMPLSTEMIB] Nadeau, T., Srinivasan, C., Farrel, A., Hall, T., 305 and Harrison, E., "Generalized Multiprotocol Label 306 Switching (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering Management 307 Information Base", draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-te-mib- 308 03.txt, November 2003, work in progress. 310 [TCMIB] Nadeau, T., Cucchiara, J. (Editors) "Definitions 311 of Textual Conventions for Multiprotocol Label 312 Switching (MPLS) Management", Internet Draft 313 , August 2003, 314 work in progress. 316 7. Acknowledgements 318 Special thanks to Joan Cucchiara for her help with compilation 319 issues. 321 8. Authors' Addresses 323 Thomas D. Nadeau 324 Cisco Systems, Inc. 325 300 Apollo Drive 326 Chelmsford, MA 01824 327 Phone: +1-978-244-3051 328 Email: tnadeau@cisco.com 330 Cheenu Srinivasan 331 Bloomberg L.P. 332 499 Park Ave., 333 New York, NY 10022 334 Phone: +1-212-893-3682 335 Email: cheenu@bloomberg.net 337 Adrian Farrel 338 Old Dog Consulting 339 Phone: +44-(0)-1978-860944 340 Email: adrian@olddog.co.uk 342 Tim Hall 343 Data Connection Ltd. 344 100 Church Street 345 Enfield, Middlesex 346 EN2 6BQ, UK 347 Phone: +44 20 8366 1177 348 Email: timhall@dataconnection.com 350 Ed Harrison 351 Data Connection Ltd. 352 100 Church Street 353 Enfield, Middlesex 354 EN2 6BQ, UK 355 Phone: +44 20 8366 1177 356 Email: ed.harrison@dataconnection.com 358 9. Full Copyright Statement 360 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved. 362 This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished 363 to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain 364 it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published 365 and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any 366 kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are 367 included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this 368 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing 369 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other 370 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of 371 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for 372 copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be 373 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than 374 English. 376 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be 377 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This 378 document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS 379 IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK 380 FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT 381 LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL 382 NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY 383 OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 385 10. Intellectual Property Notice 387 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 388 intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to 389 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 390 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 391 might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it 392 has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the 393 IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and 394 standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11 [RFC2028]. 396 Copies of claims of rights made available for publication and any 397 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 398 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of 399 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this 400 specification can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. 402 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 403 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 404 rights that may cover technology that may be required to practice 405 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive 406 Director.