idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-05.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You should update this to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License Policy document (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is required now. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3667, Section 5.1 on line 393. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.5 on line 407. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 1 on line 373. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 380. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 3 on line 386. ** The document claims conformance with section 10 of RFC 2026, but uses some RFC 3978/3979 boilerplate. As RFC 3978/3979 replaces section 10 of RFC 2026, you should not claim conformance with it if you have changed to using RFC 3978/3979 boilerplate. ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.1 IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line, instead of the newer IETF Trust Copyright according to RFC 4748. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.5 Disclaimer, instead of the newer disclaimer which includes the IETF Trust according to RFC 4748. ** The document uses RFC 3667 boilerplate or RFC 3978-like boilerplate instead of verbatim RFC 3978 boilerplate. After 6 May 2005, submission of drafts without verbatim RFC 3978 boilerplate is not accepted. The following non-3978 patterns matched text found in the document. That text should be removed or replaced: By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, or will be disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668. 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 2) being 62 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 (June 2004) is 7253 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 260, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3031' is defined on line 270, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3209' is defined on line 274, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3212' is defined on line 278, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3472' is defined on line 286, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3473' is defined on line 290, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'GMPLSSonetSDH' is defined on line 293, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'GMPLSLSRMIB' is defined on line 299, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'GMPLSTEMIB' is defined on line 305, but no explicit reference was found in the text -- 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-05 == Outdated reference: A later version (-16) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-te-mib-05 Summary: 7 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 16 warnings (==), 8 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group Thomas D. Nadeau 3 Internet Draft Cisco Systems, Inc. 4 Proposed Status: Standards Track 5 Expires: December 2004 Cheenu Srinivasan 6 Bloomberg L.P. 8 Adrian Farrel 9 Old Dog Consulting 11 Tim Hall 12 Ed Harrison 13 Data Connection Ltd. 15 June 2004 17 Definitions of Textual Conventions for Generalized Multiprotocol 18 Label Switching (GMPLS) Management 20 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-05.txt 22 Status of this Memo 24 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 25 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026. 27 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 28 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 29 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 30 Drafts. 32 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 33 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 34 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 35 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 37 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 38 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 40 Abstract 42 This document defines a Management Information Base (MIB) module 43 which contains Textual Conventions to represent commonly used 44 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) management 45 information. The intent is that these TEXTUAL CONVENTIONS (TCs) will 46 be imported and used in GMPLS related MIB modules that would 47 otherwise define their own representations. 49 Table of Contents 51 1. Introduction 2 52 2. The SNMP Management Framework 2 53 3. GMPLS Textual Conventions MIB Definitions 3 54 4. Security Considerations 5 55 5. IANA Considerations 5 56 6. References 5 57 6.1. Normative References 5 58 6.2. Informational References 6 59 7. Acknowledgments 7 60 8. Authors' Addresses 7 61 9. Intellectual Property Notice 7 62 9.1. IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement 8 63 10. Full Copyright Statement 8 65 1. Introduction 67 This document defines a MIB module which contains Textual Conventions 68 for Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks. 69 These Textual Conventions should be imported by MIB modules which 70 manage GMPLS networks. 72 This MIB module supplements the MIB module in [TCMIB] that defines 73 Textual Conventions for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) 74 Management. [TCMIB] may continue to be used without this MIB module 75 in networks that support only MPLS. 77 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 78 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 79 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 81 Comments should be made directly to the CCAMP mailing list at 82 ccamp@ops.ietf.org. 84 For an introduction to the concepts of GMPLS, see [GMPLSArch]. 86 2. The SNMP Management Framework 88 For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current 89 Internet-Standard Management Framework, please refer to section 7 of 90 RFC 3410 [RFC3410]. 92 Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed 93 the Management Information Base or MIB. MIB objects are generally 94 accessed through the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP). 95 Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms defined in the 96 Structure of Management Information (SMI). This memo specifies a MIB 97 module that is compliant to the SMIv2, which is described in STD 58, 98 RFC 2578 [RFC2578], STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58, RFC 2580 99 [RFC2580]. 101 3. GMPLS Textual Conventions MIB Definitions 103 GMPLS-TC-STD-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN 105 IMPORTS 106 MODULE-IDENTITY 107 FROM SNMPv2-SMI 108 transmission 109 FROM SNMPv2-SMI 110 TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 111 FROM SNMPv2-TC 112 ; 114 gmplsTCStdMIB MODULE-IDENTITY 115 LAST-UPDATED 116 "200406010900Z" -- 1 June 2004 9:00:00 GMT" 117 ORGANIZATION "Common Control And Management Protocols (CCAMP) 118 Working Group" 119 CONTACT-INFO 120 " Thomas D. Nadeau 121 Cisco Systems, Inc. 122 Email: tnadeau@cisco.com 124 Cheenu Srinivasan 125 Bloomberg L.P. 126 Email: cheenu@bloomberg.net 128 Adrian Farrel 129 Old Dog Consulting 130 Email: adrian@olddog.co.uk 132 Ed Harrison 133 Data Connection Ltd. 134 Email: ed.harrison@dataconnection.com 136 Tim Hall 137 Data Connection Ltd. 138 Email: tim.hall@dataconnection.com 140 Comments about this document should be emailed direct to the 141 CCAMP working group mailing list at ccamp@ops.ietf.org" 142 DESCRIPTION 143 "Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This version of this 144 MIB module is part of RFCXXX; see the RFC itself for full legal 145 notices. 147 This MIB module defines Textual Conventions for concepts used in 148 Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks." 150 -- Revision history. 151 REVISION 152 "200406010900Z" -- 1 June 2004 9:00:00 GMT" 153 DESCRIPTION 154 "Initial version published as part of RFC XXXX." 155 -- Please see the IANA Considerations Section. 156 -- The requested gmplsStdMIB subId is xx, i.e. 157 ::= { gmplsStdMIB xx } 158 gmplsStdMIB OBJECT IDENTIFIER 159 -- This object identifier needs to be assigned by IANA. 160 -- Since mpls has been assigned an ifType of 166 we recommend 161 -- that this OID be 166 as well, i.e. 162 ::= { transmission XXX } 164 -- Textual Conventions (sorted alphabetically). 166 GmplsFreeformLabel ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 167 STATUS current 168 DESCRIPTION 169 "This value represents a freeform generalized MPLS Label. This 170 can be used to represent label types which are not standard 171 in the drafts. It may also be used by systems that do not 172 wish to represent the labels using the specific label types." 173 SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..64)) 175 GmplsGeneralizedLabelTypes ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 176 STATUS current 177 DESCRIPTION 178 "Determines the interpretation that should be applied to a 179 label." 180 SYNTAX INTEGER { 181 gmplsMplsLabel(1), 182 gmplsPortWavelengthLabel(2), 183 gmplsFreeformGeneralizedLabel(3), 184 gmplsSonetLabel(4), 185 gmplsSdhLabel(5), 186 gmplsWavebandLabel(6) 187 } 189 GmplsSegmentDirection ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 190 STATUS current 191 DESCRIPTION 192 "The direction of data flow on an LSP segment with respect to the 193 head of the LSP. 195 Where an LSP is signaled using a conventional signaling 196 protocol, the 'head' of the LSP is the source of the signaling 197 (also known as the ingress) and the 'tail' is the destination 198 (also known as the egress). For unidirectional LSPs, this 199 usually matches the direction of flow of data. 201 For manually configured unidirectional LSPs the direction of the 202 LSP segment matches the direction of flow of data. For manually 203 configured bidirecitonal LSPs, an arbitrary decision must be 204 made about which LER is the 'head'." 205 SYNTAX INTEGER { 206 forward(1), 207 reverse(2) 208 } 210 END 212 4. Security Considerations 214 This module does not define any management objects. Instead, it 215 defines a set of textual conventions which may be used by other GMPLS 216 MIB modules to define management objects. 218 Meaningful security considerations can only be written in the MIB 219 modules that define management objects. Therefore, this document has 220 no impact on the security of the Internet. 222 5. IANA Considerations 224 IANA is requested to make a MIB OID assignment under the transmission 225 branch, that is, assign the gmplsStdMIB under { transmission 166 }. 227 This sub-id is requested because 166 is the ifType for mpls(166) and 228 is available under transmission. 230 In the future, GMPLS related standards track MIB modules should be 231 rooted under the mplsStdMIB (sic) subtree. IANA is requested to 232 manage that namespace. New assignments can only be made via a 233 Standards Action as specified in [RFC2434]. 235 This document also requests IANA to assign { gmplsStdMIB xx } to the 236 GMPLS-TC-STD-MIB specified in this document. The value 1 is 237 suggested. 239 6. References 241 6.1. Normative References 243 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 244 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 246 [RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., 247 Case, J., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Structure of 248 Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, 249 RFC 2578, April 1999. 251 [RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., 252 Case, J., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Textual 253 Conventions for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 254 1999. 256 [RFC2580] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., 257 Case, J., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Conformance 258 Statements for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, April 1999. 260 [RFC3471] Berger, L. (Editor), "Generalized Multi-Protocol 261 Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional 262 Description", RFC 3471, January 2003. 264 6.2. Informational References 266 [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for 267 Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", 268 BCP: 26, RFC 2434, October 1998. 270 [RFC3031] Rosen, E., Viswananthan, A., and R. Callon, 271 Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture", 272 RFC 3031, January 2001. 274 [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., 275 Srinivasan, V., Swallow, G., "RSVP-TE: Extensions to 276 RSVP for LSP Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001. 278 [RFC3212] Jamoussi, B., (editor), et. al. "Constraint-Based 279 LSP Setup using LDP", RFC 3212, January 2002. 281 [RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D. and B. Stewart, 282 "Introduction and Applicability Statements for 283 Internet-Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, 284 December 2002. 286 [RFC3472] Ashwood-Smith, P., Berger, L. (Editors), 287 "Generalized MPLS Signaling - CR-LDP Extensions", 288 RFC 3472, January 2003. 290 [RFC3473] Berger, L. (Editor), "Generalized MPLS Signaling - 291 RSVP-TE Extensions", RFC 3473 January 2003. 293 [GMPLSSonetSDH] Mannie, E., Papadimitriou, D. (Editors), 294 "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 295 Extensions for SONET and SDH Control", Internet 296 Draft , 297 February 2003, work in progress. 299 [GMPLSLSRMIB] Nadeau, T., Srinivasan, C., Farrel, A., Hall, T., 300 and Harrison, E., "Generalized Multiprotocol Label 301 Switching (GMPLS) Label Switching Router (LSR) 302 Management Information Base", draft-ietf-ccamp- 303 gmpls-lsr-mib-05.txt, June 2004, work in progress. 305 [GMPLSTEMIB] Nadeau, T., Srinivasan, C., Farrel, A., Hall, T., 306 and Harrison, E., "Generalized Multiprotocol Label 307 Switching (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering Management 308 Information Base", draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-te-mib- 309 05.txt, June 2004, work in progress. 311 [TCMIB] Nadeau, T., Cucchiara, J. (Editors) "Definitions 312 of Textual Conventions for Multiprotocol Label 313 Switching (MPLS) Management", Internet Draft 314 , November 2003, 315 work in progress. 317 [GMPLSArch] Mannie, E. (Editor), "Generalized Multiprotocol 318 Label Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", Internet 319 Draft , May 320 2003, work in progress. 322 7. Acknowledgements 324 Special thanks to Joan Cucchiara for her help with compilation 325 issues. 327 8. Authors' Addresses 329 Thomas D. Nadeau 330 Cisco Systems, Inc. 331 300 Apollo Drive 332 Chelmsford, MA 01824 333 Phone: +1-978-244-3051 334 Email: tnadeau@cisco.com 336 Cheenu Srinivasan 337 Bloomberg L.P. 338 499 Park Ave., 339 New York, NY 10022 340 Phone: +1-212-893-3682 341 Email: cheenu@bloomberg.net 343 Adrian Farrel 344 Old Dog Consulting 345 Phone: +44 1978 860944 346 Email: adrian@olddog.co.uk 348 Tim Hall 349 Data Connection Ltd. 350 100 Church Street 351 Enfield, Middlesex 352 EN2 6BQ, UK 353 Phone: +44 20 8366 1177 354 Email: tim.hall@dataconnection.com 356 Ed Harrison 357 Data Connection Ltd. 358 100 Church Street 359 Enfield, Middlesex 360 EN2 6BQ, UK 361 Phone: +44 20 8366 1177 362 Email: ed.harrison@dataconnection.com 364 9. Intellectual Property Considerations 366 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 367 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to 368 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 369 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 370 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has 371 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information 372 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be 373 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. 375 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 376 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 377 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of 378 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this 379 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at 380 http://www.ietf.org/ipr. 382 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 383 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 384 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 385 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at 386 ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 388 9.1. IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement 390 By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable 391 patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed, 392 and any of which I become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with 393 RFC 3668. 395 10. Full Copyright Statement 397 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject 398 to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and 399 except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. 401 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an 402 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS 403 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET 404 ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, 405 INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE 406 INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED 407 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.