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

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 RFC 7330

Network Working Group                                          T. Nadeau
Internet Draft                                          Juniper Networks
Intended status: Standards Track                                  Z. Ali
Expires: December 14, 2012                                      N. Akiya
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                           June 14, 2012



              Definitions of Textual Conventions (TCs) for
          Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Management
                        draft-ietf-bfd-tc-mib-01



Abstract

   This draft defines a Management Information Base (MIB) module which
   contains Textual Conventions to represent commonly used Bidirectional
   Forwarding Detection (BFD) management information.  The intent is
   that these TEXTUAL CONVENTIONS (TCs) will be imported and used in BFD
   related MIB modules that would otherwise define their own
   representations.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on November 4, 2012.















Nadeau, Ali and Akiya.       Expires November 14, 2012       [Page 1]


                     BFD-TC-STD-MIB                     June 14, 2012



Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Requirements Language

   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 RFC-2119 [RFC2119].


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
   2.  The Internet-Standard Management Framework . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  BFD Textual Conventions MIB Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   4.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   5.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       6.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       6.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   7.  Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   8   Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   9.  Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9


1.  Introduction

   This document defines a MIB module which contains Textual Conventions
   for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) protocols.  These
   Textual Conventions should be imported by MIB modules which manage
   BFD protocols.

   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 [RFC2119].




Nadeau, Ali and Akiya.       Expires November 14, 2012       [Page 2]


                     BFD-TC-STD-MIB                     June 14, 2012



   For an introduction to the concepts of BFD, see [BFD], [BFD-1HOP] and
   [BFD-MH].


2.  The Internet-Standard Management Framework

  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].


3.  BFD Textual Conventions MIB Definitions

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

    IMPORTS
        MODULE-IDENTITY, mib-2, Unsigned32
            FROM SNMPv2-SMI                                 -- [RFC2578]

        TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
            FROM SNMPv2-TC;                                 -- [RFC2579]

    bfdTCStdMib MODULE-IDENTITY
        LAST-UPDATED "201206141200Z" -- 14 June 2012 12:00:00 EST
        ORGANIZATION "IETF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
                      Working Group"
        CONTACT-INFO
            "Thomas D. Nadeau
             Juniper Networks
             Email:  tnadeau@lucidvision.com

             Zafar Ali
             Cisco Systems, Inc.
             Email:  zali@cisco.com

             Nobo Akiya
             Cisco Systems, G.K.



Nadeau, Ali and Akiya.       Expires November 14, 2012       [Page 3]


                     BFD-TC-STD-MIB                     June 14, 2012



             Email:  nobo@cisco.com"
        DESCRIPTION
            "This MIB module defines TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONs for concepts
             used in Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)
             protocols."
        REVISION "201206141200Z" -- 14 June 2012 12:00:00 EST
        DESCRIPTION
            "Initial version. Published as RFC xxxx."
 -- RFC Ed.: RFC-editor pls fill in xxxx
    ::= { mib-2 XXX }
 -- RFC Ed.: assigned by IANA, see section 5 for details

    BfdSessIndexTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
    DISPLAY-HINT   "d"
    STATUS         current
    DESCRIPTION
        "An index used to uniquely identify BFD sessions."
    SYNTAX Unsigned32 (1..4294967295)

    BfdIntervalTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
    DISPLAY-HINT  "d"
    STATUS        current
    DESCRIPTION
        "The BFD interval in microseconds."
    SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..4294967295)

    BfdMultiplierTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
    DISPLAY-HINT    "d"
    STATUS          current
    DESCRIPTION
        "The BFD failure detection multiplier."
    SYNTAX Unsigned32 (1..255)

    BfdDiagTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
    STATUS       current
    DESCRIPTION
        "A common BFD diagnostic code."
    SYNTAX INTEGER {
        noDiagnostic(0),
        controlDetectionTimeExpired(1),
        echoFunctionFailed(2),
        neighborSignaledSessionDown(3),
        forwardingPlaneReset(4),
        pathDown(5),
        concatenatedPathDown(6),
        administrativelyDown(7),
        reverseConcatenatedPathDown(8)
    }



Nadeau, Ali and Akiya.       Expires November 14, 2012       [Page 4]


                     BFD-TC-STD-MIB                     June 14, 2012




    BfdSessTypeTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
    STATUS        current
    DESCRIPTION
        "BFD session type"
    REFERENCE
        "Katz, D. and D. Ward, Bidirectional Forwarding
              Detection (BFD), RFC 5880, June 2010.

         Katz, D. and D. Ward, Bidirectional Forwarding
              Detection (BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop),
              RFC 5881, June 2010.

         Katz, D. and D. Ward, Bidirectional Forwarding
              Detection (BFD) for Multihop Paths, RFC 5883,
              June 2010."
    SYNTAX INTEGER {
        singleHop(1),
        multiHopTotallyArbitraryPaths(2),
        multiHopOutOfBandSignaling(3),
        multiHopUnidirectionalLinks(4),
        multiPointHead(5),
        multiPointTail(6)
    }

    BfdSessOperModeTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
    STATUS            current
    DESCRIPTION
        "BFD session operating mode"
    REFERENCE
        "Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding
              Detection (BFD)", RFC 5880, June 2010."
    SYNTAX INTEGER {
        asyncModeWEchoFunction(1),
        asynchModeWOEchoFunction(2),
        demandModeWEchoFunction(3),
        demandModeWOEchoFunction(4)
    }

    BfdCtrlDestPortNumberTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
    DISPLAY-HINT            "d"
    STATUS                  current
    DESCRIPTION
        "UDP destination port number of BFD control packets.
         3784 represents single hop BFD session.
         4784 represents multi hop BFD session.
         However, syntax is left open to wider range of values
         purposely for two reasons:



Nadeau, Ali and Akiya.       Expires November 14, 2012       [Page 5]


                     BFD-TC-STD-MIB                     June 14, 2012



         1. implementation uses non-compliant port number for
            valid proprietary reason.
         2. potential future extension drafts."
    REFERENCE
        "Use of port 3784 from Katz, D. and D. Ward,
              Bidirectional Forwarding
              Detection (BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop)",
              RFC 5881, June 2010.

         Use of port 4784 from Katz, D. and D. Ward, Bidirectional
              Forwarding Detection (BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6
              (Single Hop), RFC 5881, June 2010."
    SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..65535)

    BfdCtrlSourcePortNumberTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
    DISPLAY-HINT              "d"
    STATUS                    current
    DESCRIPTION
        "UDP source port number of BFD control packets.
         However, syntax is left open to wider range of values
         purposely for two reasons:
         1. implementation uses non-compliant port number for
            valid proprietary reason.
         2. potential future extension drafts."
    REFERENCE
        "Port 49152..65535 (RFC5881)"
    SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..65535)

    BfdSessStateTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
    STATUS         current
    DESCRIPTION
        "BFD session state. State failing(5) is only applicable if
         corresponding session is running in BFD version 0."
    REFERENCE
        "RFC 5880 - Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), Katz,
         D., Ward, D., June 2010."
    SYNTAX INTEGER {
        adminDown(1),
        down(2),
        init(3),
        up(4),
        failing(5)
    }

    BfdSessAuthenticationTypeTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
    STATUS                      current
    DESCRIPTION
        "BFD authentication type"



Nadeau, Ali and Akiya.       Expires November 14, 2012       [Page 6]


                     BFD-TC-STD-MIB                     June 14, 2012



    REFERENCE
        "Sections 4.2 - 4.4 from Katz, D. and D. Ward,
         Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD),
         RFC 5880, June 2010."
    SYNTAX INTEGER {
        noAuthentication(-1),
        reserved(0),
        simplePassword(1),
        keyedMD5(2),
        meticulousKeyedMD5(3),
        keyedSHA1(4),
        meticulousKeyedSHA1(5)
    }

    BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
    DISPLAY-HINT                  "1x "
    STATUS                        current
    DESCRIPTION
        "BFD authentication key type.

         A BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC is always interpreted within
         the context of an BfdSessAuthenticationTypeTC value.  Every
         usage of the BfdSessionAuthenticationTypeTC textual
         convention is required to specify the the
         BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC object that provides the
         context.  It is suggested that the
         BfdSessionAuthentcationTypeTC object be logically registered
         before the object(s) that use the
         BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC textual convention, if they
         appear in the same logical row.

         The value of a BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC must always be
         consistent with the value of the associated
         BfdSessionAuthencationTypeTC object.  Attempts to set a
         BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC object to a value inconsistent
         with the associated BfdSessionAuthenticationTypeTC must fail
         with an inconsistentValue error.

         The following size constraints for a
         BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC object are defined for the
         associated BfdSessionAuthenticationTypeTC values show below:

         noAuthentication(-1): SIZE(0)
         reserved(0): SIZE(0)
         simplePassword(1): SIZE(1..16)
         keyedMD5(2): SIZE(16)
         meticulousKeyedMD5(3): SIZE(16)
         keyedSHA1(4): SIZE(20)



Nadeau, Ali and Akiya.       Expires November 14, 2012       [Page 7]


                     BFD-TC-STD-MIB                     June 14, 2012



         meticulousKeyedSHA1(5): SIZE(20)

         When this textual convention is used as the syntax of an
         index object, there may be issues with the limit of 128
         sub-identifiers specified in SMIv2, STD 58.  In this case,
         the object definition MUST include a 'SIZE' clause to limit
         the number of potential instance sub-identifiers; otherwise
         the applicable constraints MUST be stated in the appropriate
         conceptual row DESCRIPTION clauses, or in the surrounding
         documentation if there is no single DESCRIPTION clause that
         is appropriate."
    REFERENCE
        "RFC5880, Sections 4.2 - 4.4"
    SYNTAX OCTET STRING(SIZE(0..252))

    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 BFD
   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.


5.  IANA Considerations

   The MIB module in this document uses the following IANA-assigned
   OBJECT IDENTIFIER values recorded in the SMI Numbers registry:

           Descriptor        OBJECT IDENTIFIER value
           ----------        -----------------------

           bfdTCStdMib       { mib-2 XXX }

   [RFC Editor Note (to be removed prior to publication): the IANA is
   requested to assign a value for "XXX" under the 'mib-2' subtree and
   to record the assignment in the SMI Numbers registry.  When the
   assignment has been made, the RFC Editor is asked to replace "XXX"
   (here and in the MIB module) with the assigned value and to remove
   this note.]


6.  References



Nadeau, Ali and Akiya.       Expires November 14, 2012       [Page 8]


                     BFD-TC-STD-MIB                     June 14, 2012




6.1.  Normative References

   [BFD]      Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding
              Detection (BFD)", RFC 5880, June 2010.

   [BFD-1HOP] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding
              Detection (BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop)",
              RFC 5881, June 2010.

   [BFD-MH]   Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding
              Detection (BFD) for Multihop Paths", RFC 5883,
              June 2010.

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

   [RFC2579]  McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J.
              Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Textual Conventions for SMIv2",
              STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999.

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

6.2.  Informative References

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

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



Appendix A.  Acknowledgments

   We would like to thank David Ward and Jeffrey Haas for their comments
   and suggestions.


Authors' Addresses

   Thomas D. Nadeau
   Juniper Networks
   Email: tnadeau@lucidvision.com



Nadeau, Ali and Akiya.       Expires November 14, 2012       [Page 9]


                     BFD-TC-STD-MIB                     June 14, 2012




   Zafar Ali
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   2000 Innovation Drive
   Kanata, Ontario  K2K 3E8
   Canada

   Email: zali@cisco.com

   Nobo Akiya
   Cisco Systems G.K.
   Shinjuku Mitsui Building
   2-1-1 Nishi-Shinjuku, Shinjuku-Ku
   Tokyo  163-0409
   Japan

   Email: nobo@cisco.com


































Nadeau, Ali and Akiya.       Expires November 14, 2012      [Page 10]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129b, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/