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

Versions: 00

Internet Engineering Task Force                       D. Harrington, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                 Huawei Technologies (USA)
Intended status: Best Current                          February 11, 2008
Practice
Expires: August 14, 2008


         A Template for Internet Drafts Containing Data Models
              draft-ietf-opsawg-data-model-doc-template-00

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.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on August 14, 2008.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

Abstract

   This memo contains two annotated templates for IETF documents that
   contain the definition of data models.  It is intended to alleviate
   the work of the authors of such documents, making these more uniform
   and easier to read and review, thus furthering the quality of such
   documents and expediting their publication.





Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


Note: Foreword to RFC Editor

   Note to RFC Editor - throughout the templates in the appendices,
   there are numerous sample requests for action by the RFC Editor that
   should not be removed from the template before publication of the
   template.  These need to retain the RFC Editor requests to match the
   boilerplate included in the template.

   For simplicity, there are no notes to the RFC Editor in this document
   that should be removed, except THIS section - the complete section
   entitled "Note: Foreword to RFC Editor".

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   4.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   5.  Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   6.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   Appendix A.  Change Log  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   Appendix B.  Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   Appendix C.  Text Template with Advice . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   Appendix D.  Text Template without Advice  . . . . . . . . . . . . 15



























Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


1.  Introduction

   This memo contains two annotated templates for IETF documents that
   contain the definition of data models.  It it intended to alleviate
   the work of the authors of such documents, making these more uniform
   and easier to read and review, thus furthering the quality of such
   documents and expedite their publication.

2.  Overview

   The templates enclosed in this document were developed to make IETF
   documents that contain data models more consistent.  This makes it
   easier to review the document.  There are a number of MUSTs in the
   document; these usually refer to IESG requirements for internet
   drafts, and reviewers are likely to check for these requirements.

   The template contains boilerplates for IETF data model documents.
   Using the latest revision of this template should ensure that the
   latest revision of the boilerplates are used, but the most up-to-date
   revisions are available at http://www.ops.ietf.org/ and
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/formatting.html.

   The template contains sections that describe the purpose and
   organization of the data model, and the relationship between this
   data model and other data models.  This makes it easier for reviewers
   to understand the data model, which speeds the IESG approval process.

   The document template does not include a template for the data model
   itself.  Tools to validate data models typically require that the
   data model be separated from the surrounding document.  The simplest
   approach therefore is to develop the data model outside the document
   that contains the surrounding text, and then include the data model
   into the surrounding document written using this template.

   An XML version of this template for use with xml2rfc is also
   available at http://www.ops.ietf.org.

3.  Security Considerations

   This memo contans a template for editing; it has no impact on network
   security.

4.  IANA Considerations

   This memo includes no request to IANA.






Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


5.  Contributors

   This template is based on contributions from the MIB Doctors,
   especially Bert Wijnen, Dan Romascanu, Juergen Schoenwaelder, Dave
   Perkins, C.M.Heard and Randy Presuhn.

6.  Normative References

   [RFC4181]  Heard, C., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of MIB
              Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, September 2005.

Appendix A.  Change Log

   Changes from draft-harrington-text-mib-doc-template-04 to -00-

   1.  Changed all references to "MIB modules" to "data models"

   2.  Removed references to RFC4181

   3.  modified reference to mib-specific boilerplates to data-model
       boilerplates

   4.  modified sections that refered to SNMP

   5.  rewrote sections as an envelope for the template.

Appendix B.  Open Issues

   Should this template be based on
   draft-ietf-opsawg-operations-and-management.txt?

   Should "data models" be changed to "management data models"?

   Should "data models" be changed to "management information models" in
   places, to reflect that there may be relationships between different
   types of data models, such as Netconf data models, syslog SDEs, and
   MIB modules?

   need new Management Framework boilerplate

   need Security Considerations for a Data Model document

   need IANA boilerplate for non-MIB data models

Appendix C.  Text Template with Advice


--- start of template ---



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


Internet Engineering Task Force                             Y. Name, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                        Editor affiliation
Intended status: Historic                              February 11, 2008
Expires: August 14, 2008


                     Your data model document name
                   Your data model document name here

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.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on August 14, 2008.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

Abstract

   [[anchor1: This template is for authors of IETF specifications
   containing data models.  This template can be used as a starting
   point to produce specifications that comply with the Operations &
   Management Area guidelines for data model internet drafts.
   Throughout the template, the marker "[TEMPLATE TODO]" is used as a
   placeholder to indicate an element or text that requires replacement
   or removal.  All the places with [TEMPLATE TODO] markers should be
   replaced or removed before the document is submitted.]]



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   This memo defines a portion of the Network Management Information
   Base (NMIB) for use with network management protocols.  In particular
   it defines objects for managing [TEMPLATE TODO].

   [[anchor2: [TEMPLATE TODO]: describe what functionality will be
   managed using this data model.  It can be good to mention the
   protocol being managed, and whether there is a particular aspect of
   the protocol to be managed, or a particular goal of the model.  But
   keep it brief.  Remember, don't put any citations in the abstract,
   and expand your acronyms.]]

Foreword to template users

   This template helps authors write the surrounding text needed in a
   data model internet draft, but does not provide a template for
   writing the data model itself.

   Throughout this template, the marker "[TEMPLATE TODO]" is used as a
   reminder to the template user to indicate an element or text that
   requires replacement or removal by the template user before
   submission to the internet draft editor.  All [TEMPLATE TODO] markers
   should be resolved and removed before you submit your document to the
   internet-draft editor.

   For updated information on data model guidelines and templates, see
   [RFC4181] and http://www.ops.ietf.org/.

   For information on writing internet drafts or RFCs, see
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt and RFC2223(bis), and
   look at http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html for issues to note when
   writing drafts.

   This template is not meant to be a complete list of everything needed
   to write data model internet drafts, but to summarize the often-
   needed basic features to get a document containing a data model
   started.  An important purpose of the template is to aid authors in
   developing an internet draft that is laid out in a manner consistent
   with other internet drafts containing data models.  Internet drafts
   submitted for advancement to the standards track typically require
   review by various directorates and expert reviewers.  This template
   standardizes the layout and naming of sections, includes the
   appropriate boilerplate text, and facilitates the development of
   tools to automate the checking of data model internet drafts, to
   speed the WG and IESG review processes.

   An XML template is also available.  For information on XML2RFC, see
   RFC2629 [RFC2629],
   http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/html/rfc2629.html and "bis":



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   http://xml.resource.org/authoring/draft-mrose-writing-rfcs.html.
   Also see http://xml.resource.org/authoring/README.html for 'rfc'
   option strings.  The benefit of using the XML version of the template
   is that comments in the XML describe how to fill in each section of
   the template, and then XML2RFC will generate the actual internet-
   draft with your information.  XML2RFC automatically handles much of
   the boilerplate, references, and idnits issues for you.

   [TEMPLATE TODO] THIS section, the complete section entitled "Note:
   Foreword to template users" should be removed by the template user
   from their document before submission.

   [TEMPLATE TODO] Remove all page headings from the template document,
   and replace them with the appropriate headings for your internet
   draft.

Note to RFC Editor re: [TEMPLATE TODO] markers

   Note to RFC Editor: When a document is developed using this template,
   the editor of the document should replace or remove all the places
   marked [TEMPLATE TODO] before submitting the document.  If there are
   still [TEMPLATE TODO] markers, please send the document back to the
   editor.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction
   2.  The Internet-Standard Management Framework
   3.  Conventions
   4.  Overview
   5.  Structure of the Data Model
     5.1.  New Data Types
     5.2.  The [TEMPLATE TODO] Subtree
     5.3.  The Notifications Subtree
     5.4.  The Table Structures
   6.  Relationship to Other Data Models
     6.1.  Relationship to the [TEMPLATE TODO] Data Model
     6.2.  Data Models required for IMPORTS
   7.  Definitions
   8.  Security Considerations
   9.  IANA Considerations
   10. Contributors
   11. References
     11.1. Normative References
     11.2. Informative References
   Appendix A.  Change Log
   Appendix B.  Open Issues




Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


1.  Introduction

   This memo defines a portion of the Network Management Information
   Base (NMIB) for use with network management protocols.  In particular
   it defines a data model for managing the [TEMPLATE TODO]

   [[anchor4: [TEMPLATE TODO]: describe what functionality will be
   managed using this data model.  Include citations for protocol
   specifications, architectures, related data models, and protocol-
   specific management requirements.  Provide an overview of why a data
   model is appropriate for this protocol, whether there is a particular
   aspect of the protocol to be managed, and how the model is expected
   to be used to achieve particular goals.  Highlight anything
   'different' about the model.  For example, a read-only data model.]]

2.  The Internet-Standard Management Framework

   [[anchor6: The title and text for this section has been copied from
   the official boilerplate, and should not be modified unless the
   boilerplate text at http;//ops.ietf.org has changed.  See RFC4181
   section 3.1 for a discussion of the boilerplate section.]]

   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 Network Management Information Base or NMIB.

   The SMIv2 MIB is a subset of the NMIB.  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).  SMIv2 is described in STD
   58, RFC 2578 [RFC2578], STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58, RFC
   2580 [RFC2580].

   NMIB objects may be accessed through other protocols, such as the
   Network Configuration Protocol (Netconf).  Objects in the NMIB are
   defined using the mechanisms defined in the Structure of Management
   Information (SMI).  This memo specifies a data model that is
   compliant to the [DISCUSS].

3.  Conventions

   [[anchor8: [TEMPLATE TODO] This boilerplate should be used if the
   RFC2119 key words are used in the internet draft.  The text in this
   section has been copied from the official boilerplate, and should not
   be modified.]]



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   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].

4.  Overview

   [[anchor10: [TEMPLATE TODO] The narrative part should include an
   overview section that describes the scope and field of application of
   the data models defined by the specification.  See RFC4181 section 
   3.2 for a discussion of the Narrative section.]]

5.  Structure of the Data Model

   [[anchor12: [TEMPLATE TODO] The narrative part SHOULD include one or
   more sections to briefly describe the structure of the data models
   defined in the specification.]]

5.1.  New Data Types

   [[anchor14: [TEMPLATE TODO] describe any data types defined in the
   data model, and their purpose.  It may be helpful to highlight any
   textual conventions data types imported from partner documents.
   Generic and Common Data Types can be found summarized at
   http://www.ops.ietf.org/common-datatypes.html.  [DISCUSS: need to
   craete the appropriate web pages for ops.ietf.org.]  If there are no
   new data types defined in your data model, this section should say
   so.]]

5.2.  The [TEMPLATE TODO] Subtree

   [[anchor16: [TEMPLATE TODO] copy this section for each subtree in the
   data model, and describe the purpose of the subtree.  For example,
   "The fooStats subtree provides information for identifying fault
   conditions and performance degradation of the foo functionality."]]

5.3.  The Notifications Subtree

   [[anchor18: [TEMPLATE TODO] describe the notifications defined in the
   data model, and their purpose.  Include a discussion of congestion
   control.  You might want to discuss throttling as well.  See RFC2914.
   If there are no notifications defined in your data model, this
   section should say so.]]

5.4.  The Table Structures

   [[anchor20: [TEMPLATE TODO] Describe the tables in the data model,
   their purpose, and their relationship to each other.  Has the data
   model been normalized? e.g., If the row in one table is related to a



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   row in another table, what happens when one of the rows is deleted?
   Should the related row be deleted as well?  If a row is added to one
   table, does this have implications for the other tables?  Consider
   both directions.]]

6.  Relationship to Other Data Models

   [[anchor22: [TEMPLATE TODO]: The narrative part should include a
   section that specifies the relationship (if any) of the data models
   contained in this internet draft to other standards, particularly to
   standards containing other data models.  If the data models defined
   by the specification import definitions from other data models or are
   always implemented in conjunction with other data models, then those
   facts should be noted in the narrataive section, as should any
   special interpretations of objects in other data models.  Note that
   citations may NOT be put into the data model portions of the internet
   draft, but documents used for Imported items are Normative
   References, so the citations should exist in the narrative section of
   the internet draft.  The preferred way to fill in a REFERENCE clause
   withnin a data model is of the form: "Guidelines for Writing an IANA
   Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC2434, section 2.3.]]

6.1.  Relationship to the [TEMPLATE TODO] Data Model

   [[anchor24: Example: The Interface data model [RFC2863] requires that
   any data model which is an adjunct of the Interface data model
   clarify specific areas within the Interface data model.  These areas
   were intentionally left vague in the Interface data model to avoid
   over-constraining the data model, thereby precluding management of
   certain media-types.  Section 4 of [RFC2863] enumerates several areas
   which a media-specific data model must clarify.  The implementor is
   referred to [RFC2863] in order to understand the general intent of
   these areas.]]

6.2.  Data Models required for IMPORTS

   [[anchor26: [TEMPLATE TODO]: Citations are not permitted within a
   data model, but any model mentioned in an IMPORTS clause or document
   mentioned in a REFERENCE clause is a Normative reference, and must be
   cited someplace within the narrative sections.  If there are imported
   items in the data model, such as data types, that are not already
   cited, they can be cited in text here.  Since relationships to other
   data models should be described in the narrative text, this section
   is typically used to cite models from which data types are imported.
   Example: "The following data model IMPORTS objects from SNMPv2-SMI
   [RFC2578], SNMPv2-TC [RFC2579], SNMPv2-CONF [RFC2580], and IF-MIB
   [RFC2863]."]]




Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


7.  Definitions

   [[anchor28: This section contains the actual data model(s).  These
   data models MUST conform to the guidelines for data modeling langauge
   usage and naming conventions, as described in RFC XXXX.]]

   [TEMPLATE TODO]: put your valid data model here.
   A list of tools that can help automate the process of
   validating data model definitions can be found at
   http://tools.ietf.org

8.  Security Considerations

   [[anchor30: [TEMPLATE TODO] Each internet draft that defines one or
   more data models MUST contain a section that discusses security
   considerations relevant to those models.  This section MUST be
   patterned after the latest approved template (available at
   http://www.ops.ietf.org/data-model-security.html).]]

   [[anchor31: [TEMPLATE TODO] if your data model permits modifying
   objects at runtime, including creating or deleting instances, please
   include the following boilerplate paragraph, and list.the objects and
   their sensitivity.]]

   There are a number of management objects defined in this data model
   which can be modified and/or created and/or deleted at runtime.  Such
   objects may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network
   environments.  The support for such operations in a non-secure
   environment without proper protection can have a negative effect on
   network operations.  These are the structures and objects and their
   sensitivity/vulnerability:

   o

   [[anchor32: [TEMPLATE TODO] else if there are no modifiable objects
   in your data model, use the following boilerplate paragraph.]]

   There are no management objects defined in this data model that can
   be created, deleted, or modified at runtime.  If this data model is
   implemented correctly, there is no risk that an intruder can alter or
   create any management objects of this data model.

   [[anchor33: For all data models you must evaluate whether any
   readable objects are sensitive or vulnerable (for instance, if they
   might reveal customer information or violate personal privacy laws
   such as those of the European Union if exposed to unathorized
   parties).  If so, please include the following boilerplate
   paragraph.]]



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   Some of the readable objects in this data model may be considered
   sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments.  It is
   important to control access to these data objects and possibly to
   encrypt the values of these objects when sending them over the
   network.  These are the structures and objects and their sensitivity/
   vulnerability:

   o

   o  [[anchor34: [TEMPLATE TODO] you should explicitly list by name any
      readable objects that are sensitive or vulnerable and the
      associated security risks should be spelled out.]]

   [[anchor35: [TEMPLATE TODO] The following three boilerplate
   paragraphs should not be changed without very good reason.  Changes
   will almost certainly require justification during IESG review.]]

   Versions of management protocols might not include adequate security.
   Even if the network itself is secure (for example by using IPsec),
   there is no control as to who on the secure network is allowed to
   create, modify, or read the objects in this data model.

   It is RECOMMENDED that implementers support security features
   including cryptographic mechanisms for authentication, integrity
   checking, confidentiality, and data access controls.

   It is RECOMMENDED that operators deploy management protocols with
   security features including authentication, integrity checking,
   confidentiality, and data access controls.and to enable the security
   features.  It is then a customer/operator responsibility to ensure
   that the entity giving access to an instance of this data model is
   properly configured to give access only to those principals (users)
   that have legitimate rights to create, modify, delete, or read the
   objects in this data model.

9.  IANA Considerations

   [[anchor37: [TEMPLATE TODO] In order to comply with IESG policy as
   set forth in http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html, every Internet-
   Draft that is submitted to the IESG for publication MUST contain an
   IANA Considerations section.  The requirements for this section vary
   depending what actions are required of the IANA.  See "Guidelines for
   Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs" [RFC2434]. and see
   RFC4181 section 3.5 for more information on writing an IANA clause
   for a data model internet draft.]]

   Option #1:




Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


        The data model in this document uses the following IANA
        assignment recorded in the [TEMPLATE TODO] registry:


   Option #2:

   Editor's Note (to be removed prior to publication): the IANA is
   requested to assign a value for "XXX" and to record the assignment in
   the [TEMPLATE TODO] registry.  When the assignment has been made, the
   RFC Editor is asked to replace "XXX" (here and in the data model)
   with the assigned value and to remove this note.

   Note well: prior to official assignment by the IANA, an internet
   draft MUST use placeholders (such as "XXX" above) rather than actual
   names or numbers.

   Option #3:

   This memo includes no request to IANA.

10.  Contributors

11.  References

11.1.  Normative References

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

   [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", STD 58, RFC 2580,
              April 1999.

11.2.  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.

   [RFC2629]  Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629,



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


              June 1999.

   [RFC4181]  Heard, C., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of MIB
              Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, September 2005.

Appendix A.  Change Log

   This optional section should be removed before the internet draft is
   submitted to the IESG for publication as an RFC.

Appendix B.  Open Issues

   [[anchor43: [TEMPLATE TODO] This list of issues listed in this
   optional section should be cleared and removed, and this optional
   section should be removed before the internet draft is submitted to
   the IESG for publication as an RFC.]]

Author's Address

   Editor name (editor)
   Editor affiliation
   Editor affiliation address
   Editor affiliation address
   Editor affiliation address

   Phone: Editor address
   EMail: Editor email

Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

   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, THE IETF TRUST 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.

Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 14]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   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.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).



---- end of template ---

Appendix D.  Text Template without Advice


--- start of template ---



Internet Engineering Task Force                             Y. Name, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                        Editor affiliation
Intended status: Historic                              February 11, 2008
Expires: August 14, 2008


                     Your data model document name
                   Your data model document name here

Status of This Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 15]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   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.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on August 14, 2008.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

Abstract

   This memo defines a portion of the Network Management Information
   Base (NMIB) for use with network management protocols.  In particular
   it defines objects for managing [TEMPLATE TODO].

Foreword to template users

   This template helps authors write the surrounding text needed in a
   data model internet draft, but does not provide a template for
   writing the data model itself.

   Throughout this template, the marker "[TEMPLATE TODO]" is used as a
   reminder to the template user to indicate an element or text that
   requires replacement or removal by the template user before
   submission to the internet draft editor.  All [TEMPLATE TODO] markers
   should be resolved and removed before you submit your document to the
   internet-draft editor.

   For updated information on data model guidelines and templates, see
   [RFC4181] and http://www.ops.ietf.org/.




Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 16]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   For information on writing internet drafts or RFCs, see
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt and RFC2223(bis), and
   look at http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html for issues to note when
   writing drafts.

   This template is not meant to be a complete list of everything needed
   to write data model internet drafts, but to summarize the often-
   needed basic features to get a document containing a data model
   started.  An important purpose of the template is to aid authors in
   developing an internet draft that is laid out in a manner consistent
   with other internet drafts containing data models.  Internet drafts
   submitted for advancement to the standards track typically require
   review by various directorates and expert reviewers.  This template
   standardizes the layout and naming of sections, includes the
   appropriate boilerplate text, and facilitates the development of
   tools to automate the checking of data model internet drafts, to
   speed the WG and IESG review processes.

   An XML template is also available.  For information on XML2RFC, see
   RFC2629 [RFC2629],
   http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/html/rfc2629.html and "bis":
   http://xml.resource.org/authoring/draft-mrose-writing-rfcs.html.
   Also see http://xml.resource.org/authoring/README.html for 'rfc'
   option strings.  The benefit of using the XML version of the template
   is that comments in the XML describe how to fill in each section of
   the template, and then XML2RFC will generate the actual internet-
   draft with your information.  XML2RFC automatically handles much of
   the boilerplate, references, and idnits issues for you.

   [TEMPLATE TODO] THIS section, the complete section entitled "Note:
   Foreword to template users" should be removed by the template user
   from their document before submission.

   [TEMPLATE TODO] Remove all page headings from the template document,
   and replace them with the appropriate headings for your internet
   draft.

Note to RFC Editor re: [TEMPLATE TODO] markers

   Note to RFC Editor: When a document is developed using this template,
   the editor of the document should replace or remove all the places
   marked [TEMPLATE TODO] before submitting the document.  If there are
   still [TEMPLATE TODO] markers, please send the document back to the
   editor.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 17]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   2.  The Internet-Standard Management Framework
   3.  Conventions
   4.  Overview
   5.  Structure of the Data Model
     5.1.  New Data Types
     5.2.  The [TEMPLATE TODO] Subtree
     5.3.  The Notifications Subtree
     5.4.  The Table Structures
   6.  Relationship to Other Data Models
     6.1.  Relationship to the [TEMPLATE TODO] Data Model
     6.2.  Data Models required for IMPORTS
   7.  Definitions
   8.  Security Considerations
   9.  IANA Considerations
   10. Contributors
   11. References
     11.1. Normative References
     11.2. Informative References
   Appendix A.  Change Log
   Appendix B.  Open Issues

1.  Introduction

   This memo defines a portion of the Network Management Information
   Base (NMIB) for use with network management protocols.  In particular
   it defines a data model for managing the [TEMPLATE TODO]

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 Network Management Information Base or NMIB.

   The SMIv2 MIB is a subset of the NMIB.  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).  SMIv2 is described in STD
   58, RFC 2578 [RFC2578], STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58, RFC
   2580 [RFC2580].

   NMIB objects may be accessed through other protocols, such as the
   Network Configuration Protocol (Netconf).  Objects in the NMIB are
   defined using the mechanisms defined in the Structure of Management
   Information (SMI).  This memo specifies a data model that is
   compliant to the [DISCUSS].



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 18]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


3.  Conventions

   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].

4.  Overview

5.  Structure of the Data Model

5.1.  New Data Types

5.2.  The [TEMPLATE TODO] Subtree

5.3.  The Notifications Subtree

5.4.  The Table Structures

6.  Relationship to Other Data Models

6.1.  Relationship to the [TEMPLATE TODO] Data Model

6.2.  Data Models required for IMPORTS

7.  Definitions


   [TEMPLATE TODO]: put your valid data model here.
   A list of tools that can help automate the process of
   validating data model definitions can be found at
   http://tools.ietf.org

8.  Security Considerations

   There are a number of management objects defined in this data model
   which can be modified and/or created and/or deleted at runtime.  Such
   objects may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network
   environments.  The support for such operations in a non-secure
   environment without proper protection can have a negative effect on
   network operations.  These are the structures and objects and their
   sensitivity/vulnerability:

   o

   There are no management objects defined in this data model that can
   be created, deleted, or modified at runtime.  If this data model is
   implemented correctly, there is no risk that an intruder can alter or
   create any management objects of this data model.



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 19]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   Some of the readable objects in this data model may be considered
   sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments.  It is
   important to control access to these data objects and possibly to
   encrypt the values of these objects when sending them over the
   network.  These are the structures and objects and their sensitivity/
   vulnerability:

   o

   o

   Versions of management protocols might not include adequate security.
   Even if the network itself is secure (for example by using IPsec),
   there is no control as to who on the secure network is allowed to
   create, modify, or read the objects in this data model.

   It is RECOMMENDED that implementers support security features
   including cryptographic mechanisms for authentication, integrity
   checking, confidentiality, and data access controls.

   It is RECOMMENDED that operators deploy management protocols with
   security features including authentication, integrity checking,
   confidentiality, and data access controls.and to enable the security
   features.  It is then a customer/operator responsibility to ensure
   that the entity giving access to an instance of this data model is
   properly configured to give access only to those principals (users)
   that have legitimate rights to create, modify, delete, or read the
   objects in this data model.

9.  IANA Considerations

   Option #1:


        The data model in this document uses the following IANA
        assignment recorded in the [TEMPLATE TODO] registry:


   Option #2:

   Editor's Note (to be removed prior to publication): the IANA is
   requested to assign a value for "XXX" and to record the assignment in
   the [TEMPLATE TODO] registry.  When the assignment has been made, the
   RFC Editor is asked to replace "XXX" (here and in the data model)
   with the assigned value and to remove this note.

   Note well: prior to official assignment by the IANA, an internet
   draft MUST use placeholders (such as "XXX" above) rather than actual



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 20]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   names or numbers.

   Option #3:

   This memo includes no request to IANA.

10.  Contributors

11.  References

11.1.  Normative References

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

   [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", STD 58, RFC 2580,
              April 1999.

11.2.  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.

   [RFC2629]  Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629,
              June 1999.

   [RFC4181]  Heard, C., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of MIB
              Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, September 2005.

Appendix A.  Change Log

   This optional section should be removed before the internet draft is
   submitted to the IESG for publication as an RFC.

Appendix B.  Open Issues

Author's Address




Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 21]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


   Editor name (editor)
   Editor affiliation
   Editor affiliation address
   Editor affiliation address
   Editor affiliation address

   Phone: Editor address
   EMail: Editor email

Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

   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, THE IETF TRUST 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.

Intellectual Property

   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.



Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 22]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).





---- end of template ---

Author's Address

   David Harrington (editor)
   Huawei Technologies (USA)
   1700 Alma Drive, Suite 100
   Plano, TX 75075
   USA

   Phone: +1 603 436 8634
   EMail: dharrington@huawei.com






























Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 23]


Internet-Draft      Data Model Document Text Template      February 2008


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

   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, THE IETF TRUST 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.

Intellectual Property

   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.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).







Harrington               Expires August 14, 2008               [Page 24]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.124, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/