idnits 2.17.1 draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib-03.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 3978, Section 5.1 on line 15. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.5, updated by RFC 4748 on line 276. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 1 on line 253. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 260. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 3 on line 266. ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Reference to BCP 78. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust Copyright Line does not match the current year -- 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 (March 20, 2007) is 6241 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) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4646 (Obsoleted by RFC 5646) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2932 (Obsoleted by RFC 5132) Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 8 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 IETF D. McWalter, Ed. 3 Internet-Draft Data Connection Ltd 4 Proposed Status: Standards Track March 20, 2007 5 Expires: September 21, 2007 7 A MIB Textual Convention for Language Tags 8 draft-mcwalter-langtag-mib-03.txt 10 Status of this Memo 12 By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any 13 applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware 14 have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes 15 aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. 17 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 18 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 19 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 20 Drafts. 22 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 23 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 24 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 25 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 27 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 28 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 30 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 31 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 33 This Internet-Draft will expire on September 21, 2007. 35 Copyright Notice 37 Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). 39 Abstract 41 This MIB module defines a textual convention to represent BCP 47 42 language tags. The intent is that this textual convention will be 43 imported and used in MIB modules that would otherwise define their 44 own representation. 46 Table of Contents 48 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 49 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 50 3. The Internet-Standard Management Framework . . . . . . . . . . 3 51 4. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 52 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 53 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 54 7. Notes to the RFC editor - remove before publication . . . . . 5 55 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 56 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 57 9.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 58 9.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 59 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 60 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 7 62 1. Introduction 64 This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) 65 for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. 66 It defines a textual convention to represent BCP 47 [RFC4646] 67 language tags. 69 The LangTag textual convention defined by this RFC replaces the 70 similar LanguageTag textual convention defined by RFC 2932 [RFC2932]. 72 The old LanguageTag textual convention is used by some existing MIB 73 modules. New MIB modules should use the LangTag textual convention, 74 which has been created (and is to be preferred) for the following 75 reasons: 77 o Its syntax description is current, and is more comprehensive. 79 o It is short enough to use as an index object without subtyping, 80 yet is of adequate length to represent any language tag in 81 practice. 83 o It is provided in a dedicated MIB module to simplify module 84 dependencies. 86 It is not possible to apply changes in syntax and length to an 87 existing textual convention. This is why the creation of a new 88 textual convention with a new name was necessary. 90 2. Terminology 92 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 93 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 94 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 96 3. The Internet-Standard Management Framework 98 For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current 99 Internet-Standard Management Framework, please refer to section 7 of 100 RFC 3410 [RFC3410]. 102 Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed 103 the Management Information Base or MIB. MIB objects are generally 104 accessed through the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP). 105 Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms defined in the 106 Structure of Management Information (SMI). This memo specifies a MIB 107 module that is compliant to the SMIv2, which is described in STD 58, 108 RFC 2578 [RFC2578], STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58, RFC 2580 109 [RFC2580]. 111 4. Definitions 113 LANGTAG-TC-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN 115 IMPORTS 116 MODULE-IDENTITY, mib-2 FROM SNMPv2-SMI -- [RFC2578] 117 TEXTUAL-CONVENTION FROM SNMPv2-TC; -- [RFC2579] 119 langTagTcMIB MODULE-IDENTITY 120 LAST-UPDATED "200703200000Z" -- 20 March 2007 121 ORGANIZATION "IETF Operations and Management (OPS) Area" 122 CONTACT-INFO "EMail: ops-area@ietf.org 123 Home page: http://www.ops.ietf.org/" 124 DESCRIPTION 125 "This MIB module defines a textual convention for 126 representing BCP 47 language tags." 127 REVISION "200703200000Z" -- 20 March 2007 128 DESCRIPTION 129 "Initial revision, published as RFC yyyy. 131 Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). This version of this 132 MIB module is part of RFC yyyy; see the RFC itself for full 133 legal notices." 134 -- RFC Ed.: replace yyyy with actual RFC number & remove this note 135 ::= { mib-2 XXX } 136 -- RFC Ed.: replace XXX with IANA-assigned number & remove this note 138 LangTag ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 139 DISPLAY-HINT "1a" 140 STATUS current 141 DESCRIPTION 142 "A language tag, constructed in accordance with BCP 47. 144 Only lowercase characters are allowed. The purpose of this 145 restriction is to provide unique language tags for use as 146 indexes. BCP 47 recommends case conventions for user 147 interfaces, but objects using this textual convention MUST 148 use only lowercase. 150 Values MUST be well-formed language tags, in conformance 151 with the definition of well-formed tags in BCP 47. An 152 implementation MAY further limit the values it accepts to 153 those permitted by a 'validating' processor, as defined in 154 BCP 47. 156 In theory, BCP 47 language tags are of unlimited length. 157 The language tag described in this TC is of limited length. 158 The analysis of language tag lengths in BCP 47 confirms that 159 this limit will not pose a problem in practice. In 160 particular, this length is greater than the minimum 161 requirements set out in section 4.3.1. 163 A zero-length language tag is not a valid language tag. 164 This can be used to express 'language tag absent' where 165 required, for example when used as an index field." 166 REFERENCE "RFC 4646 BCP 47" 167 SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0 | 2..63)) 169 END 171 5. Security Considerations 173 This MIB module does not define any management objects. Instead, it 174 defines a textual convention that may be imported by other MIB 175 modules and used for object definitions. 177 Meaningful security considerations can only be written in the MIB 178 modules that define management objects. This document therefore has 179 no impact on the security of the Internet. 181 6. IANA Considerations 183 LANGTAG-TC-MIB should be rooted under the mib-2 subtree. IANA is 184 requested to assign { mib-2 XXX } to the LANGTAG-TC-MIB module 185 specified in this document. 187 7. Notes to the RFC editor - remove before publication 189 This document should be published simultaneously with IPMCAST-MIB 190 (draft-ietf-mboned-ip-mcast-mib). 192 This is because LANGTAG-MIB replaces the LanguageTag textual 193 convention that is already present in RFC 2932, which will be 194 obsoleted by the publication of IPMCAST-MIB. 196 8. Acknowledgements 198 This MIB module is a reworking of existing material from RFC 2932. 200 This module was generated by editing together contributions from 201 Randy Presuhn, Dan Romascanu, Bill Fenner, Juergen Schoenwaelder, 202 Bert Wijnen, Doug Ewell, and Ira McDonald. 204 9. References 205 9.1 Normative References 207 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 208 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 210 [RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J. 211 Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Structure of Management Information 212 Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April 1999. 214 [RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J. 215 Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Textual Conventions for SMIv2", 216 STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999. 218 [RFC2580] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., and J. Schoenwaelder, 219 "Conformance Statements for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, 220 April 1999. 222 [RFC4646] Phillips, A. and M. Davis, "Tags for Identifying 223 Languages", BCP 47, RFC 4646, September 2006. 225 9.2 Informative References 227 [RFC2932] McCloghrie, K., Farinacci, D., and D. Thaler, "IPv4 228 Multicast Routing MIB", RFC 2932, October 2000. 230 [RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart, 231 "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet- 232 Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, December 2002. 234 Author's Address 236 David McWalter (editor) 237 Data Connection Ltd 238 100 Church Street 239 Enfield EN2 6BQ 240 United Kingdom 242 Email: dmcw@dataconnection.com 244 Intellectual Property Statement 246 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 247 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to 248 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 249 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 250 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has 251 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information 252 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be 253 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. 255 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 256 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 257 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of 258 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this 259 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at 260 http://www.ietf.org/ipr. 262 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 263 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 264 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 265 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at 266 ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 268 Disclaimer of Validity 270 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an 271 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS 272 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND 273 THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS 274 OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF 275 THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED 276 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 278 Copyright Statement 280 Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). This document is subject to the 281 rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as 282 set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. 284 Acknowledgment 286 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the 287 Internet Society.