[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-nadeau-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib) 00 01 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 RFC 4801

Network Working Group                              Thomas D. Nadeau, Ed.
Internet Draft                                       Cisco Systems, Inc.
Proposed Status: Standards Track
Expires: March 2007                                   Adrian Farrel, Ed.
                                                      Old Dog Consulting

                                                          September 2006

     Definitions of Textual Conventions for Generalized Multiprotocol
                   Label Switching (GMPLS) Management

                  draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-11.txt

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as
   Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be
   accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

Abstract

   This document defines a Management Information Base (MIB) module
   which contains Textual Conventions to represent commonly used
   Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) management
   information. The intent is that these TEXTUAL CONVENTIONS (TCs) will
   be imported and used in GMPLS related MIB modules that would
   otherwise define their own representations.

Nadeau and Farrel             Expires March 2007                [Page 1]

          draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-11.txt            September 2006

Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ...................................... 2
   2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework ........ 2
   3. GMPLS Textual Conventions MIB Definitions ......... 3
   4. Security Considerations ........................... 5
   5. IANA Considerations ............................... 6
   6. References ........................................ 6
   6.1. Normative References ............................ 6
   6.2. Informative References .......................... 7
   7. Acknowledgements .................................. 7
   8. Contact Information ............................... 7
   9. Intellectual Property Considerations .............. 8
   10. Full Copyright Statement ......................... 9

1. Introduction

   This document defines a MIB module which contains Textual Conventions
   for Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks. These
   Textual Conventions should be imported by MIB modules which manage
   GMPLS networks.

   This MIB module supplements the MIB module in [RFC3811] that defines
   Textual Conventions for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)
   Management. [RFC3811] may continue to be used without this MIB module
   in networks that support only MPLS.

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119,
   reference [RFC2119].

   For an introduction to the concepts of GMPLS, see [RFC3945].

2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework

   For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current
   Internet-Standard Management Framework, please refer to section 7 of
   RFC 3410 [RFC3410].

   Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed
   the Management Information Base or MIB. MIB objects are generally
   accessed through the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP).
   Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms defined in the
   Structure of Management Information (SMI). This memo specifies a MIB
   module that is compliant to the SMIv2, which is described in STD 58,
   RFC 2578 [RFC2578], STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58, RFC 2580
   [RFC2580].



Nadeau and Farrel             Expires March 2007                [Page 2]

          draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-11.txt            September 2006

3. GMPLS Textual Conventions MIB Definitions

   This MIB module makes references to the following documents.
   [RFC2578], [RFC2579], and [RFC3811].

   GMPLS-TC-STD-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN

   IMPORTS
     MODULE-IDENTITY
       FROM SNMPv2-SMI                                    -- RFC2578
     TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
       FROM SNMPv2-TC                                     -- RFC2579
     mplsStdMIB
       FROM MPLS-TC-STD-MIB                               -- RFC3811
   ;

   gmplsTCStdMIB MODULE-IDENTITY
     LAST-UPDATED
       "200609060001Z" -- 06 September 2006 00:00:01 GMT
     ORGANIZATION
       "IETF Common Control And Measurement Plane (CCAMP) Working Group"
     CONTACT-INFO
       "       Thomas D. Nadeau
               Cisco Systems, Inc.
        Email: tnadeau@cisco.com

               Adrian Farrel
               Old Dog Consulting
        Email: adrian@olddog.co.uk

        Comments about this document should be emailed direct to the
        CCAMP working group mailing list at ccamp@ops.ietf.org"
     DESCRIPTION
       "Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).  This version of
        this MIB module is part of RFC XXX; see the RFC itself for
        full legal notices.
-- RFC Editor. Please replace XXX above with the correct RFC number and
-- remove this note.

        This MIB module defines TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONs for concepts used in
        Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) networks."
     REVISION
        "200609060001Z" -- 06 September 2006 00:00:01 GMT
     DESCRIPTION
       "Initial version published as part of RFC XXX."
   ::= { mplsStdMIB YYY }
-- RFC Editor. Please replace XXX above with the correct RFC number and
-- remove this note.
-- RFC Editor. Please replace YYY above with the OID assigned by IANA
-- and remove this note

Nadeau and Farrel             Expires March 2007                [Page 3]

          draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-11.txt            September 2006

   GmplsFreeformLabelTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
     STATUS      current
     DESCRIPTION
       "This Textual Convention can be used as the syntax of an object
        that contains any GMPLS label. Objects with this syntax can be
        used to represent labels that have label types that are not
        defined in any RFCs. The freeform GMPLS Label may also be used
        by systems that do not wish to represent labels that have
        label types defined in RFCs using type-specific syntaxes."
     REFERENCE
       "1. Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling
           Functional Description, RFC 3471, section 3.2."
     SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..64))

   GmplsLabelTypeTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
     STATUS      current
     DESCRIPTION
       "Determines the interpretation that should be applied to an
        object that encodes a label. The possible types are:

        gmplsMplsLabel(1)           - The label is an MPLS packet, cell,
                                      or frame label and is encoded as
                                      described for the Textual
                                      Convention MplsLabel defined in
                                      RFC 3811.

        gmplsPortWavelengthLabel(2) - The label is a port or wavelength
                                      label as defined in RFC 3471.

        gmplsFreeformLabel(3)       - The label is any form of label
                                      encoded as an OCTET STRING using
                                      the Textual Convention
                                      GmplsFreeformLabel.

        gmplsSonetLabel(4)          - The label is a SONET label as
                                      defined in RFC 3946.

        gmplsSdhLabel(5)            - The label is an SDH label as
                                      defined in RFC 3946.

        gmplsWavebandLabel(6)       - The label is a waveband label as
                                      defined in RFC 3471."
     REFERENCE
       "1. Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling
           Functional Description, RFC 3471, section 3.
        2. Definition of Textual Conventions and for Multiprotocol Label
           Switching (MPLS) Management, RFC 3811, section 3.
        3. Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Extensions
           for Synchronous Optical Network (SONET) and Synchronous
           Digital Hierarchy (SDH) Control, RFC 3946, section 3."

Nadeau and Farrel             Expires March 2007                [Page 4]

          draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-11.txt            September 2006

     SYNTAX INTEGER {
       gmplsMplsLabel(1),
       gmplsPortWavelengthLabel(2),
       gmplsFreeformGeneralizedLabel(3),
       gmplsSonetLabel(4),
       gmplsSdhLabel(5),
       gmplsWavebandLabel(6)
     }

   GmplsSegmentDirectionTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
     STATUS      current
     DESCRIPTION
       "The direction of data flow on an LSP segment with respect to the
        head of the LSP.

        Where an LSP is signaled using a conventional signaling
        protocol, the 'head' of the LSP is the source of the signaling
        (also known as the ingress) and the 'tail' is the destination
        (also known as the egress). For unidirectional LSPs, this
        usually matches the direction of flow of data.

        For manually configured unidirectional LSPs the direction of the
        LSP segment matches the direction of flow of data. For manually
        configured bidirectional LSPs, an arbitrary decision must be
        made about which LER is the 'head'."
     SYNTAX  INTEGER {
       forward(1),   -- data flows from head-end of LSP toward tail-end
       reverse(2)    -- data flows from tail-end of LSP toward head-end
     }

  END


4. Security Considerations

   This module does not define any management objects. Instead, it
   defines a set of textual conventions which may be used by other GMPLS
   MIB modules to define management objects.

   Meaningful security considerations can only be written in the MIB
   modules that define management objects. Therefore, this document has
   no impact on the security of the Internet.









Nadeau and Farrel             Expires March 2007                [Page 5]

          draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-11.txt            September 2006

5. IANA Considerations

   IANA is requested to root MIB objects in this MIB module under the
   mplsStdMIB subtree by assigning an OID to gmplsTCStdMIB.

   Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following
   assignments in the "NETWORK MANAGEMENT PARAMETERS" registry located
   at http://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers

   In table ...mib-2.transmission.mplsStdMIB (1.3.6.1.2.1.10.166)

     Decimal  Name              References
     -------  -----             ----------
     TBD      GMPLS-TC-STD-MIB  [RFC-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib]

-- RFC Editor. Please replace YYY in the main text with the OID assigned
-- by IANA and remove this note.

   In the future, GMPLS related standards track MIB modules should be
   rooted under the mplsStdMIB (sic) subtree. IANA has been requested to
   manage that namespace in the SMI Numbers registry [RFC3811]. New
   assignments can only be made via a Standards Action as specified in
   [RFC2434].

6. References

6.1. Normative References

   [RFC2119]    Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
                Requirements Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2434]    Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
                IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
                October 1998.

   [RFC2578]    McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case,
                J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Structure of
                Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC
                2578, April 1999.

   [RFC2579]    McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case,
                J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Textual Conventions
                for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999.

   [RFC2580]    McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case,
                J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Conformance Statements
                for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, April 1999.




Nadeau and Farrel             Expires March 2007                [Page 6]

          draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-11.txt            September 2006

   [RFC3471]    Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
                (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471,
                January 2003.

   [RFC3811]    Nadeau, T. and J. Cucchiara, "Definition of Textual
                Conventions and for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS)
                Management", RFC 3811, June 2004.

   [RFC3946]    Mannie, E. and D. Papadimitriou, "Generalized Multi-
                Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Extensions for
                Synchronous Optical Network (SONET) and Synchronous
                Digital Hierarchy (SDH) Control", RFC 3946, October
                2004.

6.2. Informative References

   [RFC3410]    Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart,
                "Introduction and Applicability Statements for
                Internet-Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410,
                December 2002.

   [RFC3945]    Mannie, E., Ed., "Generalized Multiprotocol Label
                Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October 2004.

7. Acknowledgements

   This document is a product of the CCAMP Working Group.

   Special thanks to Joan Cucchiara for her help with compilation
   issues and her very thorough MIB Doctor review. Thanks also to
   Lars Eggert, David Harrington, Harrie Hazewinkel, Dan Romascanu, and
   Bert Wijnen for their review comments.

8. Contact Information

   Thomas D. Nadeau
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   1414 Massachusetts Ave.
   Boxborough, MA 01719
   Email: tnadeau@cisco.com

   Adrian Farrel
   Old Dog Consulting
   Phone: +44 1978 860944
   Email: adrian@olddog.co.uk






Nadeau and Farrel             Expires March 2007                [Page 7]

          draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-11.txt            September 2006

   Cheenu Srinivasan
   Bloomberg L.P.
   731 Lexington Ave.
   New York, NY 10022
   Phone: +1-212-617-3682
   Email: cheenu@bloomberg.net

   Tim Hall
   Data Connection Ltd.
   100 Church Street
   Enfield, Middlesex
   EN2 6BQ, UK
   Phone: +44 20 8366 1177
   Email: tim.hall@dataconnection.com

   Ed Harrison
   Data Connection Ltd.
   100 Church Street
   Enfield, Middlesex
   EN2 6BQ, UK
   Phone: +44 20 8366 1177
   Email: ed.harrison@dataconnection.com

9. Intellectual Property Considerations

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   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
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
   ipr@ietf.org.





Nadeau and Farrel             Expires March 2007                [Page 8]

          draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-tc-mib-11.txt            September 2006

10. Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).  This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
   INCLUDING 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.






































Nadeau and Farrel             Expires March 2007                [Page 9]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.107, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/