wdiff draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mib-management-overview-03.txt draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mib-management-overview-04.txt

Network Working Group D. King (Editor)
Internet-Draft Old Dog Consulting
Intended status: Informational M. Venkatesan (Editor)
Expires: August 14, November 12, 2011 Aricent
March 14,
June 12, 2011

Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport Profile (MPLS-TP)
MIB-based Management Overview
draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mib-management-overview-03.txt
draft-ietf-mpls-tp-mib-management-overview-04.txt

Abstract

A range of Management Information Base (MIB) modules has been
developed to help model and manage the various aspects of
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) networks. These MIB modules are
defined in separate documents that focus on the specific areas of
responsibility of the modules that they describe.

The MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) is a profile of MPLS
functionality specific to the construction of packet-switched
transport networks.

This document describes the MIB-based management architecture for MPLS-TP,
and indicates the interrelationships between different existing MIB
modules that can be leveraged for MPLS-TP network management and
identifies areas where additional MIB modules would be required.

This document is a product of a joint Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF) / International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication
Standardization Sector (ITU-T) effort to include an MPLS Transport
Profile within the IETF MPLS and PWE3 architectures to support the
capabilities and functionalities of a packet transport network as
defined by the ITU-T.

This Informational Internet-Draft is aimed at achieving IETF
Consensus before publication as an RFC and will be subject to an IETF
Last Call.

[RFC Editor, please remove this note before publication as an RFC and
insert the correct Streams Boilerplate to indicate that the published
RFC has IETF Consensus.]

Status of this Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and 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, June 12, 2011.

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.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction.................................................4 Introduction.................................................3
1.1 MPLS-TP Management Function.................................4
2. Terminology..................................................4
3. The SNMP Management Framework................................4
4. Summary of MPLS-TP Management Function.......................5
5. Overview of Existing Work....................................5
5.1.
4.1. MPLS Management Overview and Requirements...............5
5.2.
4.2. An Introduction to the MPLS and Pseudowire MIB Modules..6
5.2.1. Modules..5
4.2.1. Structure of the MPLS MIB OID Tree...............6
5.2.2. Tree...............5
4.2.2. Textual Convention Modules.......................7
5.2.3. Mapping Data to LSPs.............................7
5.2.4. Modules.......................6
4.2.3. Label Edge Router (LER) Modules..................7
4.2.4. Label Switching Router Modules...................8
5.2.5. Modules...................7
4.2.5. Label Switched Path Modules......................8
5.2.6. Modules......................7
4.2.6. Pseudowire Modules...............................8
5.2.7.
4.2.7. Routing and Traffic Engineering..................10
5.2.8. Resiliency.......................................10
5.2.9. Engineering..................9
4.2.8. Resiliency.......................................9
4.2.9. Fault Management and Performance Management......11
5.2.10. Management......10
4.2.10. MIB Module Interdependencies....................12
5.2.11. Interdependencies....................11
4.2.11. Dependencies on External MIB Modules............14
6. Modules............13
5. Applicability of MPLS MIB modules to MPLS-TP.................14
6.1 Gap Analysis............................................15
6.1.1
5.1 MPLS-TP Tunnel....................................15
6.1.2 Tunnel...........................................14
5.1.1 Gap Analysis.......................................14
5.1.2 Recommendations....................................15
5.2 MPLS-TP Pseudowire................................15
6.1.3 Pseudowire.......................................15
5.2.1 Gap Analysis.......................................15
5.2.2 Recommendations....................................15
5.3 MPLS-TP Sections..................................15
6.1.4 Sections.........................................15
5.3.1 Gap Analysis.......................................15
5.3.2 Recommendations....................................15
5.4 MPLS-TP OAM.......................................15
6.1.5 OAM..............................................16
5.4.1 Gap Analysis.......................................16
5.4.2 Recommendations....................................16

5.5 MPLS-TP Protection Switching......................16
7. Interfaces...................................................16
7.1. MPLS Tunnels as Interfaces..............................17
7.2. Application of the Interfaces Group to TE Links.........17
7.3. References Switching and Recovery................16
5.5.1 Gap Analysis.......................................16
5.5.2 Recommendations....................................16
5.6 MPLS-TP Interfaces.......................................16
5.6.1 Gap Analysis.......................................16
5.6.2 Recommendations....................................17
6. An Introduction to Interface Objects from MPLS MIB Modules...17
8. New the MPLS-TP MIB Modules Required for MPLS-TP.........................18
8.1 MPLS Extension Modules...................17
6.1 MPLS-TP MIB Modules...............................19
8.1.1 The MPLS Extension Modules......................................17
6.1.1 Structure of the MPLS-TP MIB OID Tree...................19
8.1.2 MPLS-TC-EXT-STD-MIB...............................19
8.1.3 MPLS-LSR-EXT-STD-MIB..............................19
8.1.4 MPLS-TE-EXT-STD-MIB...............................20
8.2 Tree.............17
6.1.2 Textual Conventions for MPLS-TP...................18
6.1.3 Identifiers for MPLS-TP...........................18
6.1.4 LSR MIB Extensions for MPLS-TP....................18
6.1.5 Tunnel Extensions for MPLS-TP.....................18
6.2 PWE3 Extension MIB Modules...............................20
8.2.1 Modules for MPLS-TP.............................18
6.2.1 Structure of the PWE3 Extension MIB OID Tree......20
8.2.2 PW-TC-EXT-STD-MIB.................................20
8.2.3 PW-EXT-STD-MIB....................................21
8.2.4 PW-MPLS-EXT-STD-MIB...............................21
8.3 Tree for MPLS-TP....19
6.2.2 Pseudowire Textual Conventions for MPLS-TP........19
6.2.3 Pseudowire Extensions for MPLS-TP.................19
6.2.4 Pseudowire MPLS Extensions for MPLS-TP............19
6.3 OAM MIB Modules..........................................21
8.3.1 Modules for MPLS-TP..............................19
6.3.1 Structure of the OAM Extension MIB OID Tree.......21
8.3.2 MPLS-LSPPING-STD-MIB..............................21
8.3.3 MPLS-BFD-STD-MIB..................................22
8.3.4 MPLS-OAM-STD-MIB..................................22

8.4. Tree for MPLS-TP.....19
6.3.2 LSP Ping MIB module...............................20
6.3.3 BFD MIB module....................................20
6.3.4 Common OAM MIB modules............................20
6.4. Protection Switching and Recovery MIB Modules........................22
8.4.1 Modules
for MPLS-TP.............................................20
6.4.1 Structure of the MPLS Extension Protection Switching
and Recovery MIB OID Tree......22
8.4.2 MPLS-LPS-STD-MIB..................................22
8.4.3 MPLS-RPS-STD-MIB..................................23
8.4.4 MPLS-MPS-STD-MIB..................................23
9. Tree for MPLS-TP.............21
6.4.2 Linear Protection Switching MIB module............21
6.4.3 Ring Protection Switching MIB module..............21
6.4.4 Mesh Protection Switching MIB module..............21
7. Management Options...........................................23
10. Options...........................................21
8. Security Considerations.....................................23
11. Considerations......................................21
9. IANA Considerations.........................................24
12. Acknowledgements............................................24
13. References..................................................24
13.1. Considerations..........................................22
10. Acknowledgements............................................22
11. References..................................................22
11.1. Normative References...................................24
13.2. References...................................22
11.2. Informational References...............................25
14. References...............................24
12. Authors' Addresses..........................................27 Addresses..........................................26

1. Introduction

The MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) is a packet transport
technology based on a profile of the MPLS functionality specific
to the construction of packet-switched transport networks.
MPLS is described in [RFC3031] and requirements for MPLS-TP are
specified in [RFC5654].

A range of Management Information Base (MIB) modules has been
developed to help model and manage the various aspects of
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) networks. These MIB modules
are defined in separate documents that focus on the specific areas of
responsibility of the modules that they describe.

An MPLS-TP network can be operated via static provisioning of
transport paths, or the elective use of a Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)
control plane to support dynamic provisioning of transport paths.

This document describes the MIB-based management architecture for
MPLS-TP and indicates the interrelationships between different
existing MIB modules that should be leveraged for MPLS-TP network
management, if SNMP is used for the management interface and
identifies areas where additional MIB modules would be required.

This document is a product of Note
that [RFC5951] does not specify a joint Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF) / International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication
Standardization Sector (ITU-T) effort to include an MPLS Transport
Profile within the IETF MPLS and PWE3 architectures preferred management interface
protocol to support be used as the
capabilities and functionalities of a packet standard protocol for managing MPLS-TP
networks.

1.1 MPLS-TP Management Function

The management of the MPLS-TP networks is inseparable from that of
its client networks so that the same means of management can be used
regardless of the client. The management functions of MPLS-TP
includes fault management, configuration management, performance
monitoring, and security management.

The purpose of the management function is to provide control and
monitoring over the protocol mechanisms and procedures that
constitute the building blocks for a transport network. profile of MPLS.
The requirements for the network management functionality are
found in [RFC5951]. A description of the network and element
management architectures that can be applied to the management
of MPLS-based transport networks is found in [RFC5950].

2. Terminology

This document also uses terminology from the MPLS architecture
document [RFC3031] and the following MPLS related MIB modules:
MPLS TC MIB [RFC3811], MPLS LSR MIB [RFC3813], MPLS TE MIB [RFC3812],
MPLS LDP MIB [RFC3815], MPLS FTN MIB [RFC3814] and TE LINK MIB
[RFC4220].

3. The SNMP Management Framework

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).

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

This document discusses MIB modules that are compliant to the SMIv2,
which is described in [RFC2578], [RFC2579] and [RFC2580].

4. Summary of MPLS-TP Management Function

The management of the MPLS-TP networks is separable from that of its
client networks so that the same means of management can be used
regardless of the client. The management functions of MPLS-TP
includes fault management, configuration management, performance
monitoring, and security management.

5. Overview of Existing Work

This section describes the existing tools and techniques for
managing and modeling MPLS networks, devices, and protocols. It does
not focus on MPLS-TP, but is
intended to provide a description of the tool kit that is already
available.

The following section (Section 6. Applicability of MPLS MIB modules
to MPLS-TP)

Section 5 of this document outlines the applicability of existing
MPLS MIB modules
and to MPLS-TP, describes the optional use of GMPLS MIB
modules to in MPLS-TP networks, and examines the additional MIB modules
and objects that would be required for managing an MPLS-TP network.

5.1.

4.1. MPLS Management Overview and Requirements

[RFC4378] outlines how data plane protocols can assist in providing
the Operations and Management (OAM) requirements outlined in
[RFC4377] and how it is applied to the management functions of fault,
configuration, accounting, performance, and security (commonly known
as FCAPS) for MPLS networks.

[RFC4221] describes the management architecture for MPLS. In
particular, it describes how the managed objects defined in various
MPLS-related MIB modules model different aspects of MPLS, as well as
the interactions and dependencies between each of these MIB modules.

[RFC4377] describes the requirements for user and data plane OAM and
applications for MPLS.

[RFC5654] describes the requirements for the optional use of a
control plane to support dynamic provisioning of MPLS-TP transport
paths. The MPLS-TP LSP control plane is based on GMPLS and is
described in [RFC3945].

5.2.

4.2. An Introduction to the MPLS and Pseudowire MIB Modules

5.2.1.

4.2.1. Structure of the MPLS MIB OID Tree

The MPLS MIB OID tree has the following structure compatible for
MPLS-TP. structure. It is based on the
tree originally set out in section 4.1 of [RFC4221] and has been
enhanced to include other relevant MIB modules.

Note: The OIDs for MIB modules are assigned and managed by IANA.
They can be found in the referenced MIB documents.

5.2.2.

4.2.2. Textual Convention Modules
MPLS-TC-STD-MIB [RFC3811] and [RFC3811], GMPLS-TC-STD-MIB [RFC4801] [RFC4801],
IANA-GMPLS-TC-MIB [RFC4802] and PW-TC-STD-MIB [RFC5542] contains the
Textual Conventions for MPLS and GMPLS networks. These Textual
Conventions should be imported by MIB modules which manage MPLS
and GMPLS networks.

5.2.3. Mapping Data Section 3.2.11. highlights dependencies on
additional external MIB modules

4.2.3. Label Edge Router (LER) Modules

Label Edge Router (LER) Module helps in mapping data to LSPs

MPLS is a packet switching protocol that operates between LSP's
based on the
Network network layer and the data link layer in the OSI model.

There is a clean separation between the control and forwarding
planes in the MPLS protocol. This helps in easy portability and
extensibility to header. The ingress device of the forwarding functions.

A router which performs MPLS forwarding
network is known as a "Label
Switching Router. An LSR implements the control and forwarding
plane of MPLS.

The LSR "control plane" provides information in terms of label
bindings which are part of called Label Edge Routers (LER).

At the information used to populate
forwarding tables in an LSR. An LSR determines which label bindings
to seek and retain based on configuration and other information.

The LSR forwarding plane then uses LER when an index which is unlabelled packet enters the incoming
interface and label (usually of 20-bit length) ingress interface,
network layer header is parsed to forward classify the
packet.

Each entry in this forwarding table corresponds packet to a forwarding
equivalence class (FEC). This can be loosely defined as the set of
characteristics that are being shared by the packets which will be
forwarded in a similar fashion and may share Each FEC is mapped to an LFIB entry to
encapsulate the same label.

MPLS packets are encapsulated by unlabelled packet with one or more label entries
referred to as the label stack. Each label stack entry consists of a
label, the 3 TC-bits for classifying the Traffic Class, the bottom of
stack bit, and TTL.

The ingress and the egress devices of the MPLS network are called
Label Edge Routers (LER). At

MPLS-FTN-STD-MIB [RFC3814] describes the LER a managed objects for mapping
FEC's to label bindings.

4.2.4. Label Switching Router Modules

A router which performs MPLS forwarding is pushed onto known as an
incoming LSR. An LSR
receives a labelled packet and popped to remove it.

At performs forwarding action based on
the ingress when label received.

LSR maintains a mapping of an unlabeled packet enters, incoming label and incoming interface
to one or more outgoing label
stack entries are (each and outgoing interfaces in its
forwarding database. When a labelled packet is received, LSR examines
the topmost label in the label stack with one and then does 'swap', 'push' or more labels) is
prefixed to this packet based on its FEC as discussed above. In

addition, the "MPLS-specific" L2 encapsulation (including, for
instance, the MPLS PID) is also added at the ingress. Then the packet
is sent to the next-hop router for further processing. The next-hop
router examines the topmost label in the label stack and then does a
swap, 'push' or 'pop' operations
'pop' operation based on the contents.

A label stack entry can be 'popped' or removed from the top of the
label stack or a label stack entry is 'pushed' or inserted into the
top of the stack based on the FEC information.

When a 'swap' operation is executed, the topmost label stack entry is
replaced with a different one and the depth of the label stack
remains the same. After the swap the packet is forwarded based on the
new entry.

MPLS-FTN-STD-MIB [RFC3814] describes the managed objects for mapping
FEC's to label bindings.

5.2.4. Label Switching Router Modules

MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB [RFC3813] describes the managed objects for modeling
a Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) [RFC3031] LSR.

MPLS-TP is specific to
MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB [RFC3813] contains the use of MPLS in transport networks.
According managed objects to [RFC5654] multipoint-to-point LSPs do not form part of
MPLS-TP, so multipoint-to-point cross-connects are out maintain
mapping of scope for
this document.

5.2.5. in-segments to out-segments.

4.2.5. Label Switched Path Modules

The path taken through the MPLS domain by a packet is referred to as
a label switched path (LSP). It is possible that this path may not be
understood or completely stored in any one LSR within the MPLS
domain.

MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB [RFC3813] defines describes the required objects for setting
up an LSP. It defines the conceptual object MPLS cross-connect that
is used to map incoming labels to outgoing labels on a MPLS enabled
interfaces. This is referenced by other MIB modules in order to refer to an underlying MPLS define
the LSP.

This label switched path can be programmed using a variety of
mechanisms. These include manual programming and using a signalling
protocol.

RSVP-TE (Resource reservation protocol for Traffic Engineering) is
normally used for signalling LSPs used for Traffic Engineering.

5.2.6.

4.2.6. Pseudowire Modules

The PW (Pseudowire) MIB modules architecture provides a layered
modular model into which any supported emulated service such as Frame
Relay, ATM, Ethernet, TDM and SONET/SDH can be connected to any
supported packet switched network (PSN) type. This MIB architecture
is modeled based on PW3 architecture [RFC3985].

Emulated Service Layer, Generic PW Layer and PSN VC Layer constitute
the different layers of the model. A combination of the MIB modules
belonging to each layer provides the glue for mapping the emulated
service onto the native PSN service. At least three MIB modules each
belonging to a different layer is are required to define a PW emulated
service.

Starting from the emulated Service Layer, the first is a
service-specific

o Service-Specific module that is dependent on the emulated signal
type.

The second is the PW-STD-MIB module, which configures general
parameters of the PW that are common to all types of emulated
services and PSN types.

The third is a PSN-specific module. There is a different module for
each type of PSN. These modules associate the PW with one or more
"tunnels" that carry the service over the PSN. These modules are
defined in other documents.

PW-TC-STD-MIB [RFC5542] contains the textual conventions required
for PW MIB modules.

PW-STD-MIB [RFC5601] defines a MIB module that can be
used to manage pseudowire (PW) services for transmission over a
Packet Switched Network (PSN) [RFC3931] [RFC4447]. This MIB module
provides generic management of PWs that is common to all types of
PSN and PW services defined by the IETF PWE3 Working Group.

PW-MPLS-STD-MIB [RFC5602] describes a model for managing pseudowire
services for transmission over different flavors of MPLS tunnels.
The general PW MIB module [RFC5601] defines the parameters global to
the PW regardless of the underlying Packet Switched Network (PSN)
and emulated service. This document is applicable for PWs that use
MPLS PSN type helps in the PW-STD-MIB. Additionally this document describes
the MIB objects that define pseudowire association to the MPLS PSN,
that is not specific to the carried service.

Together, [RFC3811], [RFC3812] and [RFC3813] describe the modeling of
an MPLS tunnel, and a tunnel's underlying cross-connects. This MIB
module supports MPLS-TE PSN, non-TE MPLS PSN (an outer tunnel created
by the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) or manually), and MPLS PW
label only (no outer tunnel). emulated service layer.

PW-ENET-STD-MIB [RFC5603] describes a model for managing Ethernet
pseudowire services for transmission over a PSN. This MIB module is
generic and common to all types of PSNs supported in the Pseudowire
Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) architecture [RFC3985], which describes
the transport and encapsulation of L1 and L2 services over supported
PSN types.

In particular, the MIB module associates a port or specific VLANs on
top of a physical Ethernet port or a virtual Ethernet interface (for
Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS)) to a point-to-point PW. It is
complementary to the PW-STD-MIB [RFC5601], which manages the generic
PW parameters common to all services, including all supported PSN
types.

PW-TDM-MIB [RFC5604] describes a model for managing TDM pseudowires,
i.e., TDM data encapsulated for transmission over a Packet Switched
Network (PSN). The term TDM in this document is limited to the
scope of Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy (PDH). It is currently
specified to carry any TDM Signals in either Structure Agnostic
Transport mode (E1, T1, E3, and T3) or in Structure Aware
Transport mode (E1, T1, and NxDS0) as defined in the Pseudowire
Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) TDM Requirements document [RFC4197].

5.2.7. Routing and Traffic Engineering

In MPLS traffic engineering, its possible

o Generic PW Module configures general parameters of the PW that are
common to specify explicit all types of emulated services and PSN types.

o PSN-specific module associate the PW with one or more "tunnels"
that carry the service over the PSN. There is a different module
for each type of PSN.

PW-MPLS-STD-MIB [RFC5602] describes a model for managing pseudowire
services for transmission over different flavors of MPLS tunnels.
The general PW MIB module [RFC5601] defines the parameters global to
the PW regardless of the underlying Packet Switched Network (PSN)
and emulated service. This document is applicable for PWs that use
MPLS PSN type in the PW-STD-MIB. Additionally this document describes
the MIB objects that define pseudowire association to the MPLS PSN,
that is not specific to the carried service.

4.2.7. Routing and Traffic Engineering

In MPLS traffic engineering, it's possible to specify explicit routes
or choose routes based on QOS metrics in setting up a path such that
some specific data can be routed around network hot spots. TE LSPs
can be setup through a management plane or a control plane.

MPLS-TE-STD-MIB [RFC3812] describes managed objects for modeling a
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) [RFC3031] based traffic
engineering. This MIB module should be used in conjunction with the
companion document [RFC3813] for MPLS based traffic engineering
configuration and management.

5.2.8.

4.2.8. Resiliency

An MPLS Fast Reroute is a restoration network resiliency mechanism used
in MPLS TE is to make sure that there is no interruption to redirect the
traffic onto when the failure occurs within the system or network.

Various components of MPLS resiliency solutions are,
1) Graceful restart in LDP and RSVP-TE modules
2) Make Before Break
3) Protection Switching for LSPs
4) Fast ReRoute for LSPs
5) PW redundancy

The below modules only support the SNMP based mib management
for MPLS resiliency.

MPLS Fast Reroute is a restoration network resiliency mechanism used
in MPLS TE to redirect the traffic onto the backup LSP's in 10s of
milliseconds in case of link or node failure across the LSP. Two
different modes of local protection are described in the [RFC4090] to
protect LSP.

o One-to-One Backup
o Facility Backup

Facility backup uses label stacking to reroute multiple protected TE
LSPs using a single backup TE LSP. One-to-one backup does not use
label stacking, and every protected TE LSP requires a dedicated
backup TE LSP.

MPLS-FRR-GENERAL-STD-MIB [draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-14]
contains objects that apply to any MPLS LSR implementing MPLS TE fast
reroute functionality.

MPLS-FRR-ONE2ONE-STD-MIB [draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-14]
contains objects that apply to one-to-one backup method.
MPLS-FRR-FACILITY-STD-MIB [draft-ietf-mpls-fastreroute-mib-14]
contains objects that apply to facility backup method.

5.2.9.

Protection Switching mechanisms have been designed to provide network
resiliency for MPLS network. Different types of protection switching
mechanisms such as 1:1, 1:N, 1+1 have been designed.

4.2.9. Fault Management and Performance Management

MPLS manages the LSP and pseudowire faults through the use of LSP
ping [RFC4379], VCCV [RFC5085], BFD for LSPs [RFC5884] and BFD for
VCCV [RFC5885] tools.

Current MPLS focuses on the in and/or out packet counters,
errored packets, discontinuity time.

Some of the MPLS and Pseudowire performance tables used for
performance management are given below.

mplsTunnelPerfTable provides several counters (packets forwarded,
packets dropped because of errors) to measure the performance of
the MPLS tunnels.

mplsInterfacePerfTable provides performance information (incoming and
outgoing labels in use and lookup failures) on a per-interface basis.

mplsInSegmentPerfTable contains statistical information (total
packets received by the insegment, total errored packets received,
total packets discarded, discontinuity time) for incoming MPLS
segments to an LSR.

mplsOutSegmentPerfTable contains statistical information (total
packets received, total errored packets received, total packets
discarded, discontinuity time) for outgoing MPLS segments from an
LSR.

mplsFTNPerfTable contains performance information for the specified
interface and an FTN entry mapped to this interface.

mplsLdpEntityStatsTable and mplsLdpSessionStatsTable contain
statistical information (session attempts, errored packets,
notifications) about an LDP entity.

pwPerfCurrentTable, pwPerfIntervalTable, pwPerf1DayIntervalTable
provides pseudowire performance information (in and/or out packets)
based on time (current interval, each preconfigured specific interval,
1day interval).

pwEnetStatsTable contains statistical counters specific for Ethernet
PW.

pwTDMPerfCurrentTable, pwTDMPerfIntervalTable and
pwTDMPerf1DayIntervalTable contain statistical informations
accumulated per 15-minute, 24 hour, 1 day respectively.
gmplsTunnelErrorTable and gmplsTunnelReversePerfTable provides
information about performance errored packets and in/out packet
counters.

5.2.10.

4.2.10. MIB Module Interdependencies

This section provides an overview of the relationship between the
MPLS MIB modules for managing MPLS networks. More details of these
relationships are given below.

[RFC4221] mainly focuses on the MPLS MIB module interdependencies,
this section also highlights the GMPLS and PW MIB modules
interdependencies.

The relationship "A --> B" means A depends on B and that MIB module
A uses an object, object identifier, or textual convention defined
in MIB module B, or that MIB module A contains a pointer (index or
RowPointer) to an object in MIB module B.

Thus:

- All the MPLS MIB modules depend on MPLS-TC-STD-MIB.

- All the GMPLS MIB modules depend on GMPLS-TC-STD-MIB.

- All the PW MIB modules depend on PW-TC-STD-MIB.

- MPLS-LDP-STD-MIB, MPLS-TE-STD-MIB, MPLS-FTN-STD-MIB,
GMPLS-LSR-STD-MIB, and PW-MPLS-STD-MIB contain references to
objects in MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB.

- MPLS-LDP-GENERIC-STD-MIB contains references to objects in
MPLS-LDP-STD-MIB.

- MPLS-FTN-STD-MIB, PW-MPLS-STD-MIB, and GMPLS-TE-STD-MIB contain
references to objects in MPLS-TE-STD-MIB.

- PW-MPLS-STD-MIB, and PW-ENET-STD-MIB contains references to
objects in PW-STD-MIB.

- PW-STD-MIB contains references to objects in IANA-PWE3-MIB.

- GMPLS-TE-STD-MIB contains references to objects in
IANA-GMPLS-TC-MIB.

- GMPLS-LSR-STD-MIB contains references to objects in
GMPLS-LABEL-STD-MIB.

Note that there is a textual convention (MplsIndexType) defined in
MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB that is imported by MPLS-LDP-STD-MIB.

5.2.11.

4.2.11. Dependencies on External MIB Modules

With the exception of MPLS-TC-STD-MIB, all the MPLS MIB modules have
dependencies on the Interfaces MIB [RFC2863]. MPLS-FTN-STD-MIB
references IP-capable interfaces on which received traffic is to be
classified using indexes in the Interface Table (ifTable) of IF-MIB
[RFC2863]. The other MPLS MIB modules reference MPLS-capable
interfaces in ifTable.

The Interfaces Group of IF-MIB [RFC2863] defines generic managed
objects for managing interfaces. The MPLS MIB modules contain
media-specific extensions to the Interfaces Group for managing MPLS
interfaces.

The MPLS MIB modules assume the interpretation of the Interfaces
Group to be in accordance with [RFC2863], which states that ifTable
contains information on the managed resource's interfaces and that
each sub-layer below the internetwork layer of a network interface is
considered an interface. Thus, the MPLS interface is represented as
an entry in ifTable.

The interrelation of entries in ifTable is defined by the Interfaces
Stack Group defined in [RFC2863].

The MPLS MIB modules have dependencies with the TE-LINK-STD-MIB
for maintaining the traffic engineering information.

The MPLS MIB modules depend on the CSPF constrained shortest path first
(CSPF) module to get obtain the paths path required for an MPLS tunnel to traverse to reach
the end point of the tunnel and BFD module to verify the data-plane
failures of LSPs and PWs.

Finally, all of the MIB modules import standard textual conventions
such as integers, strings, timestamps, etc., from the MIB modules in
which they are defined.

This is business as usual for a MIB module and is not discussed
further in this document.

6. Applicability of MPLS

5. Applicability of MPLS MIB modules to MPLS-TP

In addition to the MPLS management overview [RFC4221]

This section 4.12 (Dependencies and its sub sections focus on External MIB Modules), some of the
existing MPLS MIBs, PW MIBs and GMPLS MIBs are re-used with
extensions for achieving possible gaps that
exist in the MPLS MIB modules to extend its use to MPLS-TP functionality. networks.

[RFC5951] specifies the requirements for the management of
equipment used in networks supporting an MPLS-TP. It also details the
essential network management capabilities for operating networks
consisting of MPLS-TP equipment.

[RFC5950] provides the network management framework for
MPLS-TP. The document explains how network elements and networks that
support MPLS-TP can be managed using solutions that satisfy the
requirements defined in [RFC5951]. The relationship between
MPLS-TP management and OAM is described in the MPLS-TP framework
[RFC5950] document.

The MPLS mib modules MPLS-TE-STD-MIB [RFC3812], PW-STD-MIB [RFC5601]
and MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB [RFC3813] and their associated mib modules are
reused for MPLS based transport network management.

Fault management and performance management form key parts of
Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) function. MPLS-TP
OAM is described in [MPLS-TP-OAM-FWK].

[Editors note -

A seperate draft will provide an MPLS-TP abstract model and use a
formal language to define the terminology, the information that
must be retrieved and method for storing. The draft
will also list the new

5.1 MPLS-TP MIB modules identified in this
document]

6.1 Tunnel

5.1.1 Gap Analysis

6.1.1

MPLS-TP Tunnel

o An MPLS tunnel may not can be compatible operated over IP and/or ICC environments,
below points capture the gaps in existing MPLS mib modules
for non-IP environments.
i.e., managing the MPLS-TP networks.

o IP based environment
i. MPLS-TE-STD-MIB [RFC3812] does not support
tunnel ingress LSR identifier based on Global_ID and egress identifiers are Node_ID.
ii. MPLS-TE-STD-MIB [RFC3812] does not always
identified via an IP address, rather identification is achieved
using local numbers to operate in a non-IP environment. support
corouted/associated bidirectional tunnel configurations.

o Next-hop IP address in ICC based environment
i. MPLS-TE-STD-MIB [RFC3812] does not support
tunnel LSR identifier based on ICC.
ii. MPLS XC table is tunnel does not compatible support forwarding other
than the nexthop IP address.

5.1.2 Recommendations

o New MIB definitions can be created for non-IP
environment. Global_Node_ID and/or
ICC configurations.
o Bidirectional LSPs are not introduced until MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB [RFC3813] mib module can be enhanced to identify
the GMPLS MIB modules,
tunnel table nexthop based on MAC address for IP-less environment.
o MPLS-TE-STD-MIB [RFC3812] and MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB should be
enhanced to provide static and signalling mib module
extensions for corouted/associated bidirectional connectivity.

6.1.2 LSPs.

5.2 MPLS-TP Pseudowire

o MPLS pseudowire may not

5.2.1 Gap Analysis

MPLS-TP Pseudowire can be compatible for non-IP environments.
i.e., pseudowire source and destination identifiers are not always
identified via an operated over IP address, rather identification is achieved
using local numbers to operate and/or ICC environments,
below points capture the gaps in a non-IP environment.
o Pseudowire existing PW mib modules should be enhanced to operate
for managing the MPLS-TP networks.

o IP based environment
i. PW-STD-MIB [RFC5601] does not support
PW end point identifier based on Global_ID and Node_ID.
ii. PW-MPLS-STD-MIB [RFC5602] does not support
its opeation over corouted/associated bidirectional tunnels.

o ICC based environment
i. PW-STD-MIB [RFC5601] does not support
PW end point identifier based on ICC.
ii. Pseudowire does not support forwarding other
than the nexthop IP address.

5.2.2 Recommendations

o PW-MPLS-STD-MIB [RFC5602] can be enhanced to operate over
corouted/associated bi-directional tunnel.
o Pseudowire 129 FEC type-2 should can be used in non-IP and IP
environments with the required changes.

6.1.3

5.3 MPLS-TP Sections

There is no gap in the

5.3.1 Gap Analysis

The existing MPLS MIB modules as this does not support MPLS-TP
section will sections.

5.3.2 Recommendations
Link specific and/or path/segment specific sections can be defined as achieved
by enhancing the new term for MPLS-TP.

6.1.4 IF-MIB [RFC2863], MPLS-TE-STD-MIB [RFC3812] and
PW-STD-MIB [RFC5601] mib modules.

5.4 MPLS-TP OAM

5.4.1 Gap Analysis

MPLS manages the LSP and pseudowire faults through LSP ping
[RFC4379], VCCV [RFC5085], BFD for LSPs [RFC5884] and BFD for VCCV
[RFC5885] tools.

There is no MIB management model currently available for

The MPLS mib modules do not support the above
fault management tools.

There is no performance management tool currently available below MPLS-TP OAM functions,
o Continuity Check and Connectivity Verification
o Remote Defect Indication
o Route Tracing
o Alarm Reporting
o Lock Reporting
o Lock Instruct
o Client Failure Indication
o Packet Loss Measurement
o Packet Delay Measurement

5.4.2 Recommendations

New mib modules for MPLS
except BFD and LSP Ping can be created to address
all the statistics information.

6.1.5 gaps mentioned in the 5.4.1 Gap Analysis section.

5.5 MPLS-TP Protection Switching and Recovery

5.5.1 Gap Analysis

An important aspect that MPLS-TP technology provides is protection
switching. In general, the mechanism of protection switching
can be described as the substitution of a protection or standby
facility for a working or primary facility. An MPLS-TP protection
switching can be managed with the following parameters:

o Topology (linear, ring, mesh)
o Protection architecture (1+1, 1:1, or others as defined in
different topologies)
o Switching type (unidirectional, bidirectional)
o Operation mode (revertive, non-revertive)
o Automatic protection channel
o Protection state
o Position of the switch
o Timer values (hold-off, Wait-to-Restore)
o Failure of protocol

Among the parameters described above for protection switching, it is
the topology itself which has the most significant influence.
Therefore, three MIB

The MPLS mib modules are to be defined to model and
manage do not provide support for protection switching for each
and recovery of three different topologies (linear, ring and mesh) availible.

7. Interfaces

MPLS-TP can be carried over the existing and evolving physical
transport technologies such as SONET/SDH, OTN/WDM, and Ethernet.

The Interfaces Group of IF-MIB [RFC2863] defines generic managed
objects for managing interfaces. The MPLS-TP MIB
available.

5.5.2 Recommendations

New mib modules make
references to interfaces so that it can be clearly determined where
the procedures managed by the MIB modules should be performed.
Additionally, the MPLS-TP MIB modules (notably MPLS-TE-STD-MIB and
TE-LINK-STD-MIB, PW-STD-MIB) utilize interface stacking within the
Interface Group.

Please refer to section 4. (Node and Interface Identifiers) in
[MPLS-TP-IDENTIFIERS] for more information on MPLS-TP specific
interfaces.

7.1. MPLS Tunnels as Interfaces

An extension created to mplsTunnelTable should address all the tunnel
requirements specific to MPLS-TP.

MPLS Tunnel logical interfaces can be stacked over
PDH/SDH/OTH/Ethernet physical interfaces. For more information on
Tunnel interfaces, refer section 11.1 (MPLS Tunnels as Interfaces) of
RFC-4221.

7.2. Application of the Interfaces Group to TE Links

TE links can be formed over PDH/SDH/OTH/Ethernet physical interfaces.
For more information on TE links, Refer section 11.2. Application of
the Interfaces Group to TE Links of RFC-4221.

7.3. References to Interface Objects from MPLS MIB Modules

MPLSTP-STD-MIB includes the extensions of Tunnel table, PW table
for MPLS-TP.

More information on Tunnel interfaces can be found in the RFC-3812,
section 8. (Application of the Interface Group to MPLS Tunnels)

The PW gaps mentioned
in general is not an ifIndex on its own, for agent
scalability reasons. The PW is typically associated via the PWE3 MIB modules to 5.5.1 Gap Analysis section.

5.6 MPLS-TP Interfaces

5.6.1 Gap Analysis
As per [MPLS-TP-IDENTIFIERS], an ifIndex (physical entity) the PW is
emulating. Some implementations may manage LSR requires identification of the PW as an ifIndex in
node itself and of its interfaces. An interface is the
ifTable. A special ifType attachment
point to represent a PW virtual interface (246)
will be used in server layer MPLS-TP section or MPLS-TP tunnel.

The MPLS mib modules do not provide support for configuring
the ifTable in this case. More information on PW interfaces within the context of an operator.

5.6.2 Recommendations

New mib defintions can be found created to address the gaps mentioned
in the RFC-5601, section 8 (PW relations 5.6.1 Gap Analysis section.

6. An Introduction to the IF-MIB).

8. New MPLS-TP MIB Modules Required for MPLS-TP

This section highlights the new MIB modules that have been identified
in Section 6.1 (Gap Analysis) and are
as being required for MPLS-TP. This section also provides an overview
of the following:

- the MPLS Object Identifier (OID) tree structure and the position
of different MPLS related MIB modules on this tree;

- the purpose of each of the MIB modules within the MIB documents,
what it can be used for, and how it relates to the other MIB
modules.

Note that each new MIB document should module (apart from Textual Conventions
modules) will contain one or more compliance
statements for the modules and Compliance Statements to indicate
which objects that it defines. Therefore, must be suppor in what manner to claim a specific level
of compliance. Additional text, either in the support for documents that define
the different MIB modules and objects is beyond the
scope of this document, or in separate Applicability Statements, will define
which Compliance Statements need tbe conformed to in order to provide
specific MPLS-TP function. This document does not set any
requirements in that respect although some recommendations are
included in the sections that follow.

8.1 MPLS Extension

6.1 MPLS-TP MIB Modules

8.1.1 The MPLS Extension

6.1.1 Structure of the MPLS-TP MIB OID Tree

The MPLS Extension MPLS-TP MIB OID tree has the following structure.

transmission -- RFC 2578 [RFC2578]
|
+- mplsStdMIB
|
+- mplsTCExtStdMIB -- MPLS-TC-EXT-STD-MIB Textual Conventions for MPLS-TP
|
+- mplsLsrExrStdMIB -- MPLS-LSR-EXT-STD-MIB Identifiers for MPLS-TP
|
+- mplsTeExtStdMIB -- MPLS-TE-EXT-STD-MIB LSR MIB Extensions for MPLS-TP
|
+- TE MIB Extensions for MPLS-TP

Note that the mib modules mentioned here are applicable
for MPLS operations as well.

Note: The OIDs for MIB modules are yet to be assigned and managed by
IANA.

8.1.2 MPLS-TC-EXT-STD-MIB

MPLS-TC-STD-MIB

6.1.2 Textual Conventions for MPLS-TP

New textual convention mib module defines textual
conventions [RFC2579] that may be
common to MPLS-related for MPLS-TP related MIB modules.
These conventions allow multiple MIB modules to use the
same syntax and format for a concept that is shared between
the MIB modules. This MIB is extended to support new
textual definitions supporting MPLS-TP networks.

For example, MEP identifier is used to identify maintainence maintenance entity
group end point within MPLS-TP networks. The textual convention
representing the MEP identifier is defined in MPLS-TC-EXT-STD-MIB,
which is an extension to MPLS-TC-STD-MIB new textual convention
mib module.

All new extensions related to MPLS-TP are defined in this the MIB module
and will be referenced by other MIB modules to support MPLS-TP.

8.1.3 MPLS-LSR-EXT-STD-MIB

6.1.3 Identifiers for MPLS-TP

New Identifiers describe managed objects that are used to model
common MPLS-TP identifiers [MPLS-TP-IDENTIFIERS].

6.1.4 LSR MIB Extensions for MPLS-TP

MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB describes managed objects for modeling an MPLS Label
Switching Router (LSR). This puts it at the heart of the management
architecture for MPLS.

MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB MIB module is used to model and manage the basic
label switching behavior of an MPLS LSR. It represents the label
forwarding information base (LFIB) of the LSR and provides a view of
the LSPs that are being switched by the LSR in question.

Since basic MPLS label switching is common to all MPLS applications,
this MIB module is referenced by many of the other MPLS MIB modules.

In general, MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB provides a model of incoming labels on
MPLS-enabled interfaces being mapped to outgoing labels on MPLS-
enabled interfaces via a conceptual object called an MPLS cross-
connect. MPLS cross-connect entries and their properties are
represented in MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB and are typically referenced by
other MIB modules in order to refer to the underlying MPLS LSP.

In the case of MPLS-TP, the MPLS-LSR-STD-MIB is extended to support
the MPLS-TP LSP's, which are bidirectional and co-routed corouted or
associated. associated bidirectional.
This extended MIB, MPLS-LSR-EXT-STD-MIB all models of MIB is also applicable for modeling MPLS-TP tunnels.

8.1.4 MPLS-TE-EXT-STD-MIB

6.1.5 Tunnel Extensions for MPLS-TP

MPLS-TE-STD-MIB describes managed objects that are used to model and
manage MPLS Traffic Engineered (TE) Tunnels.

This MIB module is based on a table that represents TE tunnels that
either originate from, traverse via, or terminate on the LSR in
question. The MIB module provides configuration and statistics
objects needed for TE tunnels.

MPLS-TP tunnels are much similar to MPLS-TE tunnels, but are
bidirectional and could be associated co-routed or co-routed. associated.
The
MPLS-TE-EXT-STD-MIB contains the extensions MPLS-TE-STD-MIB is extended to support the MPLS-TP specific attributed
attributes for the tunnel.

8.2

6.2 PWE3 Extension MIB Modules for MPLS-TP
This section provides an overview of Pseudowire extension mib
modules to meet the MPLS based transport network requirements.

8.2.1

6.2.1 Structure of the PWE3 Extension MIB OID Tree for MPLS-TP

mib-2 -- RFC 2578 [RFC2578]
|
+-transmission
| |
| +- pwExtStdMIB -- PW-EXT-STD-MIB Pseudowire Extensions for MPLS-TP
|
+- pwMplsExtStdMIB -- PW-MPLS-EXT-STD-MIB Pseudowire MPLS Extensions for MPLS-TP
|
+- pwTcExtStdMIB -- PW-TC-EXT-STD-MIB Pseudowire Textual Conventions for MPLS-TP

Note: The OIDs for MIB modules are yet to be assigned and managed by
IANA.

8.2.2 PW-TC-EXT-STD-MIB

6.2.2 Pseudowire Textual Conventions for MPLS-TP

PW-TC-STD-MIB MIB defines textual conventions used for pseudowire
(PW) technology and for Pseudowire Edge-to-Edge Emulation (PWE3) MIB
Modules. PW-TC-EXT-STD-MIB add extensions to PW-TC-STD-MIB to support New textual convention mib module defines textual
definitions for MPLS-TP specific Pseudowire attributes.

8.2.3 PW-EXT-STD-MIB

6.2.3 Pseudowire Extensions for MPLS-TP

PW-STD-MIB describes managed objects for modeling of Pseudowire
Edge-to-Edge services carried over a general Packet Switched Network.
This MIB module is extended as PW-EXT-STD-MIB to support MPLS-TP specific attributes
related to Pseudowires.

8.2.4 PW-MPLS-EXT-STD-MIB

6.2.4 Pseudowire MPLS Extensions for MPLS-TP

PW-MPLS-STD-MIB defines the managed objects for Pseudowire
operations over MPLS LSR's. This MIB supports both,
manual and dynamically signaled PW's, point-to-point connections,
enables the use of any emulated service, MPLS-TE as outer tunnel
and no outer tunnel as MPLS-TE.

The newly extended MIB, PW-MPLS-EXT-STD-MIB MIB defines the managed objects,
extending PW-MPLS-STD-MIB, by supporting with or without
MPLS-TP as outer tunnel.

8.3

6.3 OAM MIB Modules for MPLS-TP

This section provides an overview of Operations, Administration,
and Maintenance (OAM) mib modules for MPLS LSPs and Pseudowires.

8.3.1

6.3.1 Structure of the OAM Extension MIB OID Tree for MPLS-TP
mib-2 -- RFC 2578 [RFC2578]
|
+-transmission
|
+- mplsLspPingStdMIB -- MPLS-LSPPING-STD-MIB LSP Ping MIB module
|
+- mplsBfdStdMIB -- MPLS-BFD-STD-MIB BFD MIB module
|
+- mplsOamStdMIB -- MPLS-OAM-STD-MIB OAM MIB module

Note: The OIDs for MIB modules are yet to be assigned and managed by
IANA.

8.3.2 MPLS-LSPPING-STD-MIB

6.3.2 LSP Ping MIB module

LSP ping is defined in RFC4379 [RFC4379] to validate data plane consistency
of MPLS LSP's. It defines how LSP ping and Trace Route could be
performed across MPLS networks to identify and diagnose faults
within MPLS networks. This OAM functionality is performed on demand
basis for verification purposes.

MPLS-LSPPING-STD-MIB

New mib module defines managed objects for modeling LSP ping
protocol. It allows user to perform on demand operations based on
RFC4379. The managed objects to support LSP ping for MPLS-TP is
protocol. It allows user to perform on demand operations based on draft-ietf-mpls-tp-lsp-ping-bfd-procedures-01.
[RFC4379].

For example, a MPLS-TP tunnel LSP is to be pinged, a SNMP request
issued using the MIB for the tunnel in test. The results for the
operation could be queried using the managed objects defined in the
MIB module.

8.3.3 MPLS-BFD-STD-MIB

6.3.3 BFD MIB module

BFD-STD-MIB defines managed objects for performing BFD operation in
IP networks. This MIB is modeled to support BFD protocol RFC5880.
MPLS-BFD-STD-MIB [RFC5880].
New mib module is an extension to BFD-STD-MIB managed objects
to support BFD operations on MPLS LSP's. The new MPLS-TP managed
objects for BFD are based on
draft-ietf-mpls-tp-lsp-ping-bfd-procedures-01.

8.3.4 MPLS-OAM-STD-MIB

MPLS-OAM-STD-MIB defined LSPs and PWs.

6.3.4 Common OAM MIB modules

New mib module defines managed objects for OAM maintenance
identifiers i.e. Maintenance Entity Group Identifiers (MEG),
Maintenance Entity Group End-point (MEP), Maintenance Entity Group
Intermediate Point (MIP). Maintenance points are uniquely
associated with a MEG. Within the context of a MEG, MEPs and MIPs
must be uniquely identified.

8.4.

6.4. Protection Switching and Recovery MIB Modules for MPLS-TP

This section provides an overview of protection switching mib and
recovery MIB modules for MPLS LSPs and Pseudowires.

8.4.1

6.4.1 Structure of the MPLS Protection Switching and Recovery MIB OID
Tree for MPLS-TP

mib-2 -- RFC 2578 [RFC2578]
|
+-transmission
|
+- mplsLpsStdMIB -- MPLS-LPS-STD-MIB Linear Protection Switching MIB module
|
+- mplsRpsStdMIB -- MPLS-RPS-STD-MIB Ring Protection Switching MIB module
|
+- mplsMpsStdMIB -- MPLS-MPS-STD-MIB Mesh Protection Swithcing MIB module

Note: The OIDs for MIB modules are yet to be assigned and managed by
IANA.

8.4.2 MPLS-LPS-STD-MIB
MPLS-LPS-STD-MIB defined

6.4.2 Linear Protection Switching MIB module

New mib module defines managed objects for linear protection
switching of MPLS LSPs and Pseudowires.

8.4.3 MPLS-RPS-STD-MIB

MPLS-RPS-STD-MIB defined

6.4.3 Ring Protection Switching MIB module

New mib module defines managed objects for ring protection
switching of MPLS LSPs and Pseudowires.

8.4.4 MPLS-MPS-STD-MIB

MPLS-MPS-STD-MIB defined

6.4.4 Mesh Protection Switching MIB module

New mib module defines managed objects for Mesh protection
switching of MPLS LSPs and Pseudowires.

7. Management Options

This document applies only to scenarios where MIB modules are used to
manage the MPLS-TP network. It is not the intention of this document
to provide instructions or advice to implementers of management
systems, management agents, or managed entities. It is, however,
useful to make some observations about how the MIB modules described
above might be used to manage MPLS systems. systems, if SNMP is used in the
management interface.

For MPLS specific management options, refer [RFC4221] Section 12
(Management Options).

[Editors Note: MPLS-TP specific management gaps and options will be
documented in this document and will be referenced here.]

10.

8. Security Considerations
This document describes the interrelationships amongst the different
MIB modules relevant to MPLS-TP management and as such does not have
any security implications in and of itself.

Each IETF MIB document that specifies MIB objects for MPLS-TP must
provide a proper security considerations section that explains the
security aspects of those objects.

The attention of readers is particularly drawn to the security
implications of making MIB objects available for create or write
access through an access protocol such as SNMP. SNMPv1 by itself is
an insecure environment. Even if the network itself is made secure
(for example, by using IPSec), there is no control over who on the
secure network is allowed to access the objects in this MIB. It is
recommended that the implementers consider the security features as
provided by the SNMPv3 framework. Specifically, the use of the
User-based Security Model STD 62, RFC3414 [RFC3414], and the
View-based Access Control Model STD 62, RFC 3415 [RFC3415],
is recommended.

It is then a customer/user responsibility to ensure that the SNMP
entity giving access to an instance of each MIB module is properly
configured to give access to only those objects, and to those
principals (users) that have legitimate rights to access them.

11.

9. IANA Considerations

This document makes no requests for IANA action.

12.

10. Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Eric Gray, Thomas Nadeau, Benjamin
Niven-Jenkins, Sam Aldrin
Niven-Jenkins and Saravanan Narasimhan for their valuable comments.

13.

This document benefited from review by participants in ITU-T Study
Group 15.

11. References

13.1

11.1 Normative References

[RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group
MIB using SMIv2", RFC 2863, June 2000.

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

[RFC3812] Srinivasan, C., Viswanathan, A., and T. Nadeau,
"Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic
Engineering (TE) Management Information Base (MIB)",
RFC 3812, June 2004.

[RFC3813] Srinivasan, C., Viswanathan, A., and T. Nadeau,
"Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switching
(LSR) Router Management Information Base (MIB)", RFC 3813,
June 2004.

[RFC3814] Nadeau, T., Srinivasan, C., and A. Viswanathan,
"Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) FEC-To-NHLFE
(FTN) Management Information Base", RFC3814, June
2004.

[RFC3815] Cucchiara, J., Sjostrand, H., and Luciani, J.,
"Definitions of Managed Objects for the
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS), Label
Distribution Protocol (LDP)", RFC 3815, June 2004.

[RFC4220] Dubuc, M., Nadeau, T., and J. Lang, "Traffic
Engineering Link Management Information Base", RFC
4220, November 2005.

[RFC4221] Nadeau, T., Srinivasan, C., and A. Farrel,
"Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Management
Overview", RFC 4221, November 2005.

[RFC4801] T. Nadeau and A. Farrel, Ed., "Definitions of Textual
Conventions for Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Management", RFC4801, Feb. 2007.

[RFC4802] T. D. Nadeau and A. Farrel, "Generalized Multiprotocol
Label Switching (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering Management
Information Base", RFC4802, Feb., 2007.

[RFC4803] T. D. Nadeau and A. Farrel, "Generalized Multiprotocol
Label Switching (GMPLS) Label Switching Router (LSR)
Management Information Base", RFC4803, Feb., 2007.

[RFC5542] Nadeau, T., Ed., Zelig, D., Ed., and O. Nicklass, Ed.,
"Definitions of Textual Conventions for Pseudowire (PW)
Management", RFC 5542, May 2009.

[RFC5601] Nadeau, T., Ed. and D. Zelig, Ed. "Pseudowire (PW)
Management Information Base (MIB)", RFC 5601, July 2009.

[RFC5602] Zelig, D., Ed., and T. Nadeau, Ed., "Pseudowire (PW) over
MPLS PSN Management Information Base (MIB)", RFC 5602,
July 2009.

[RFC5603] Zelig, D., Ed., and T. Nadeau, Ed., "Ethernet Pseudowire
(PW) Management Information Base (MIB)", RFC 5603,
July 2009.

[RFC5604] Nicklass, O., "Managed Objects for Time Division
Multiplexing (TDM) over Packet Switched Networks (PSNs)",
RFC5604, July 2009.

13.2

11.2 Informative References

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

[RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., and J. Schoenwaelder,
"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.

[RFC3031] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., and R. Callon,
"Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture", RFC 3031,
March 2001.

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

[RFC3414] Blumenthal, U. and B. Wijnen, "User-based Security
Model (USM) for version 3 of the Simple Network
Management Protocol (SNMPv3)", STD 62, RFC 3414,
December 2002.

[RFC3415] Wijnen, B., Presuhn, R., and K. McCloghrie, "View-based
Access Control Model (VACM) for the Simple Network
Management Protocol (SNMP)", STD 62, RFC 3415, December
2002.

[RFC3812] Srinivasan, C., Viswanathan, A., and T. Nadeau,
"Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering
(TE) Management Information Base (MIB)", RFC 3812, June
2004.

[RFC3813] Srinivasan, C., Viswanathan, A., and T. Nadeau,
"Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switching
Router (LSR) Management Information Base (MIB)", RFC 3813,
June 2004.

[RFC3931] Lau, J., Townsley, M., and I. Goyret, "Layer Two Tunneling
Protocol - Version 3 (L2TPv3)", RFC 3931, March 2005.

[RFC3945] Mannie, E. et.al., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", IETF RFC 3945, October
2004.

[RFC3985] Bryant, S. and P. Pate, "Pseudo Wire Emulation Edge-to-
Edge (PWE3) Architecture", RFC 3985, March 2005.

[RFC4090] Pan, P., Ed., Swallow, G., Ed., and A. Atlas, Ed., "Fast
Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels", RFC 4090,
May 2005.

[RFC4197] Riegel, M., "Requirements for Edge-to-Edge Emulation of
Time Division Multiplexed (TDM) Circuits over Packet
Switching Networks", RFC4197, October 2005.

[RFC4377] Nadeau, T., Morrow, M., Swallow, G., Allan, D., and S.
Matsushima, "Operations and Management (OAM) Requirements
for Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) Networks",
RFC 4377, March 2006.

[RFC4378] Allan, D. and T. Nadeau, "A Framework for Multi-Protocol
Label Switching (MPLS) Operations and Management (OAM)",
RFC 4378, March 2006.

[RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
March 2006.

[RFC4447] Martini, L., Rosen, E., El-Aawar, N., Smith, T., and
G. Heron, "Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance Using the
Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)", RFC 4447,
April 2006.

[RFC5085] Nadeau, T. and C. Pignataro, "Pseudowire Virtual
Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV): A Control
Channel for Pseudowires", RFC 5085, December 2007.

[RFC5601] Nadeau, T., Ed. and D. Zelig, Ed. "Pseudowire (PW)
Management Information Base (MIB)", RFC 5601, July 2009.

[RFC5602] Zelig, D., Ed., and T. Nadeau, Ed., "Pseudowire (PW) over
MPLS PSN Management Information Base (MIB)", RFC 5602,
July 2009.

[RFC5654] Niven-Jenkins, B., et al, "MPLS-TP Requirements",
RFC5654, September 2009.

[RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding
Detection", RFC 5880, June 2010.

[RFC5884] Aggarwal, R., Kompella, K., Nadeau, T., and G. Swallow,
"Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) For MPLS
Label Switched Paths (LSPs)", RFC 5884, June 2010.

[RFC5885] Nadeau, T. and C. Pignataro, "Bidirectional
Forwarding Detection (BFD) for the Pseudowire
Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV)",
RFC5885, June 2010.

[RFC5950] Gray, E., Mansfield, S., Lam, K.,
"MPLS-TP Network Management Framework", RFC 5950,
September 2010.

[RFC5951] Gray, E., Mansfield, S., Lam, K., "MPLS TP
Network Management Requirements", RFC 5951, September
2010.

[MPLS-TP-IDENTIFIERS] Bocci, M., Swallow, G., "MPLS-TP Identifiers"
draft-ietf-mpls-tp-identifiers-04, March 2011.

[MPLS-TP-OAM-FWK] Busi, I. and B. Niven-Jenkins, "MPLS-TP OAM
Framework and Overview", 2009,
<draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-framework>.

14.

12. Authors' Addresses

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

Daniel King
Old Dog Consulting
UK
Email: daniel@olddog.co.uk

Venkatesan Mahalingam
Aricent
India
Email: venkatesan.mahalingam@aricent.com

Scott Mansfield
Ericsson
300 Holger Way, San Jose, CA 95134, US
Phone: +1 724 931 9316
Email: scott.mansfield@ericsson.com
Jeong-dong Ryoo
ETRI
161 Gajeong, Yuseong, Daejeon, 305-700, South Korea
Phone: +82 42 860 5384
Email: ryoo@etri.re.kr

A S Kiran Koushik
Cisco Systems Inc.
Email: kkoushik@cisco.com

A. Karmakar
Cisco Systems Inc.
Email: akarmaka@cisco.com

Sam Aldrin
Huawei Technologies, co.
2330 Central Express Way,
Santa Clara, CA 95051, USA
Email: aldrin.ietf@gmail.com