draft-ietf-opsawg-smi-datatypes-in-xsd-04.txt   draft-ietf-opsawg-smi-datatypes-in-xsd-05.txt 
Network Working Group B. Natale Network Working Group B. Natale
Internet-Draft MITRE Internet-Draft MITRE
Intended status: Standards Track October 29, 2008 Intended status: Standards Track March 27, 2009
Expires: May 2, 2009 Expires: September 27, 2009
Expressing SNMP SMI Datatypes in XML Schema Definition Language Expressing SNMP SMI Datatypes in XML Schema Definition Language
draft-ietf-opsawg-smi-datatypes-in-xsd-04.txt draft-ietf-opsawg-smi-datatypes-in-xsd-05.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 2, 2009. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 27, 2009.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document.
Abstract Abstract
This memo (when approved as a standards-track RFC) defines the IETF This memo defines the IETF standard expression of Structure of
standard expression of Structure of Management Information (SMI) base Management Information (SMI) base datatypes in Extensible Markup
datatypes in Extensible Markup Language (XML) Schema Definition (XSD) Language (XML) Schema Definition (XSD) language. The primary
language. The primary objective of this memo is to enable the objective of this memo is to enable the production of XML documents
production of XML documents that are as faithful to the SMI as that are as faithful to the SMI as possible, using XSD as the
possible, using XSD as the validation mechanism. validation mechanism.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. XSD for SMI Base Datatypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. XSD for SMI Base Datatypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1. Numeric Datatypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.1. Numeric Datatypes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2. OctetString . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.2. OctetString . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.3. Opaque . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.3. Opaque . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.4. IpAddress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5.4. IpAddress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.5. ObjectIdentifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5.5. ObjectIdentifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7.1. SMI Base Datatypes Namespace Registration . . . . . . . . 15 7.1. SMI Base Datatypes Namespace Registration . . . . . . . . 14
7.2. SMI Base Datatypes Schema Registration . . . . . . . . . . 15 7.2. SMI Base Datatypes Schema Registration . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9.2. Informational References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 9.2. Informational References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Appendix A. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Appendix B. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 21
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Numerous uses exist -- both within and outside the traditional IETF Numerous uses exist -- both within and outside the traditional IETF
network management community -- for the expression of management network management community -- for the expression of management
information described in and accessible via SMI Management information described in and accessible via SMI Management
Information Base (MIB) modules as XML documents [ref.XML]. For Information Base (MIB) modules as XML documents [XML]. For example,
example, XML-based management applications which want to incorporate XML-based management applications which want to incorporate MIB
MIB modules as data models and/or to access MIB module modules as data models and/or to access MIB module instrumentation
instrumentation via gateways to SNMP agents will benefit from an IETF via gateways to SNMP agents will benefit from an IETF standard
standard mapping of SMI datatypes and structures to XML documents via mapping of SMI datatypes to XML documents via XSD.
XSD.
MIB data models are described using SMIv2 [RFC2578] and, for legacy MIB data models are described using SMIv2 [RFC2578] and, for legacy
MIBs, SMIv1 [RFC1155]. MIB data is conveyed in variable bindings MIBs, SMIv1 [RFC1155]. MIB data is conveyed in variable bindings
("varbinds") within protocol data units (PDUs) within SNMP messages ("varbinds") within protocol data units (PDUs) within SNMP messages
using the base/primitive datatypes defined in the SMI. using the base/primitive datatypes defined in the SMI.
The SMI allows for creation of derivative datatypes, termed "textual The SMI allows for creation of derivative datatypes, termed "textual
conventions" ("TCs"), each of which has a unique name, a syntax which conventions" ("TCs"), each of which has a unique name, a syntax which
is or refines a primitive SMI datatype, and relatively precise is or refines a primitive SMI datatype, and relatively precise
application-level semantics. TCs are used principally to facilitate application-level semantics. TCs are used principally to facilitate
correct application-level handling of MIB data and for the correct application-level handling of MIB data and for the
convenience of humans reading MIB modules and appropriately rendered convenience of humans reading MIB modules and appropriately rendered
MIB data output. Values in varbinds corresponding to MIB objects MIB data output. Values in varbinds corresponding to MIB objects
with TC syntaxes are always encoded as the primitive SMI datatype with TC syntaxes are always encoded as the primitive SMI datatype
underlying the TC syntax. Thus, the XSD mappings defined in this underlying the TC syntax. Thus, the XSD mappings defined in this
memo will support MIB objects with TC syntax as well as those with memo will support MIB objects with TC syntax as well as those with
base SMI syntax. base SMI syntax.
Various independent schemes have been devised for expressing the SMI Various independent schemes have been devised for expressing the SMI
datatypes and TCs in XSD [ref.XMLSchema]. These schemes have datatypes in XSD [XMLSchema]. These schemes have exhibited a degree
exhibited a degree of commonality (especially concerning the numeric of commonality (especially concerning the numeric SMI datatypes), but
SMI datatypes), but also sufficient differences (especially also sufficient differences (especially concerning the non-numeric
concerning the non-numeric SMI datatypes) to preclude general SMI datatypes) to preclude uniformity and general interoperability.
interoperability.
The primary purpose of this memo is to define a standard expression The primary purpose of this memo is to define a standard expression
of SMI base datatypes in XSD to ensure uniformity and general of SMI base datatypes in XSD to ensure fidelity, consistency, and
interoperability in this respect. Internet operators, management general interoperability in this respect. Internet operators,
tool developers, and users will benefit from the wider selection of management tool developers, and users will benefit from the wider
management tools and the greater degree of unified management -- with selection of management tools and the greater degree of unified
attendant improvements in timeliness and accuracy of management management -- with attendant improvements in timeliness and accuracy
information -- which such a standard will facilitate. of management information -- which such a standard facilitates.
This memo is the first in a set of three related and (logically)
ordered specifications:
1. SMI Base Datatypes [RFC2578] in XSD
2. SMI MIB Structure [RFC2578] in XSD On its own, this memo specifies the IETF standard way to render SMI
data values carried in SNMP messages as XML in a faithful,
consistent, and interoperable way.
3. SNMP Textual Conventions [RFC2579] in XSD Certain XML-based applications will find this specification
sufficient for their purposes. Other XML applications may need to
make more complete reuse of existing MIB modules, requiring standard
XSDs for TCs [RFC2579] and MIB structure [RFC2578]. Documents
supporting those requirements are planned, but have not been produced
at the time of this writing.
As a set, these documents define the XSD equivalent of SMIv2 to The objective of this memo, and of any future related specifications
encourage XML-based protocols to carry, and XML-based applications to that might be produced, is to define the XSD equivalent
use, the information modeled in SMIv2-compliant MIB modules. [XSDDatatypes] of SMIv2 (STD58) to encourage XML-based protocols to
carry, and XML-based applications to use, the information modeled in
SMIv2-compliant MIB modules.
This work defines XSD equivalents of the datatypes and data Having such a standard mapping of SMIv2 to XML via XSD validation
structures [RFC2578] and the textual conventions [RFC2579] defined in will enable and promote efficient reuse of existing (including
the SMIv2 standard (STD58) to encourage efficient reuse of existing future) MIB modules and instrumentation by XML-based management
(including future) MIB modules and instrumentation by XML-based protocols and applications.
management protocols and applications.
The goal of fidelity to the SMIv2 standard (STD58), as specified in The goal of fidelity to the SMIv2 standard (STD58), as specified in
the "Requirements" section below, is crucial to this effort to the "Requirements" section below, is crucial to this effort to
leverage the established "rough consensus" for the precise data leverage the established "rough consensus" for the precise data
modeling used in MIB modules, and to leverage existing "running code" modeling used in MIB modules, and to leverage existing "running code"
for implemented SMIv2 data models. This effort does not include for implemented SMIv2 data models. This effort does not include
redesign of SMIv2 datatypes or data structures or textual conventions redesign of SMIv2 datatypes or data structures or textual conventions
to overcome known limitations -- that work can be pursued in other to overcome known limitations -- that work can be pursued in other
efforts. efforts.
skipping to change at page 7, line 7 skipping to change at page 7, line 7
most direct XSD datatype, with the most parsimonious most direct XSD datatype, with the most parsimonious
restrictions, which matches the foregoing requirements. restrictions, which matches the foregoing requirements.
R7. The XML output produced as a result of meeting the foregoing R7. The XML output produced as a result of meeting the foregoing
requirements SHOULD be the most direct (i.e., avoiding requirements SHOULD be the most direct (i.e., avoiding
superfluous "decoration") from the perspective of readability by superfluous "decoration") from the perspective of readability by
humans. humans.
4. XSD for SMI Base Datatypes 4. XSD for SMI Base Datatypes
This document concerns only the SMI base datatypes -- i.e., the This document provides XSD datatype mappings for the SMIv2 base
eleven "ObjectSyntax" datatypes defined in RFC2578. These datatypes datatypes only -- i.e., the eleven "ObjectSyntax" datatypes defined
-- via tag values defined in the SMI to identify them in varbinds -- in RFC 2578. These datatypes -- via tag values defined in the SMIv2
constrain values carried "on-the-wire" in SNMP PDUs between SNMP to identify them in varbinds -- constrain values carried "on-the-
management applications and SNMP agents: wire" in SNMP PDUs between SNMP management applications and SNMP
agents:
o INTEGER, Integer32 o INTEGER, Integer32
o Unsigned32, Gauge32 o Unsigned32, Gauge32
o Counter32 o Counter32
o TimeTicks o TimeTicks
o Counter64 o Counter64
o OctetString o OCTET STRING
o Opague o Opaque
o IpAddress o IpAddress
o ObjectIdentifier o OBJECT IDENTIFIER
The "BITS" pseudo-type (also referred to as a "construct" in RFC2578) The "BITS" pseudo-type (also referred to as a "construct" in RFC
is treated as a Textual Convention for the purpose of this document 2578) is treated as a Textual Convention, not a base datatype, for
and, therefore, will be defined in the "SNMP Textual Conventions in the purpose of this document.
XSD" document.
BEGIN BEGIN
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" <xs:schema xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:opsawg:smi:base:1.0" xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:opsawg:smi:base:1.0"
targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:opsawg:smi:base:1.0" targetNamespace="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:opsawg:smi:base:1.0"
elementFormDefault="qualified" elementFormDefault="qualified"
attributeFormDefault="unqualified" attributeFormDefault="unqualified"
xml:lang="en"> xml:lang="en">
<xs:annotation> <xs:annotation>
<xs:documentation> <xs:documentation>
Mapping of SMIv2 base datatypes from RFC 2578. Mapping of SMIv2 base datatypes from RFC 2578
Contact: Bob Natale
Organization: MITRE
Address: 7515 Colshire Drive
McLean VA 22102
USA
Telephone: +1 703-983-2505
E-Mail: rnatale@mitre.org
Last Updated: 200903090000Z
</xs:documentation> </xs:documentation>
</xs:annotation> </xs:annotation>
<xs:simpleType name="INTEGER"> <xs:simpleType name="INTEGER">
<xs:restriction base="xs:int"/> <xs:restriction base="xs:int"/>
</xs:simpleType> </xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="Integer32"> <xs:simpleType name="Integer32">
<xs:restriction base="xs:int"/> <xs:restriction base="xs:int"/>
</xs:simpleType> </xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="Unsigned32"> <xs:simpleType name="Unsigned32">
<xs:restriction base="xs:unsignedInt"/> <xs:restriction base="xs:unsignedInt"/>
skipping to change at page 8, line 50 skipping to change at page 9, line 26
</xs:simpleType> </xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="IpAddress"> <xs:simpleType name="IpAddress">
<xs:restriction base="xs:string"> <xs:restriction base="xs:string">
<xs:pattern value= <xs:pattern value=
"((0|(1[0-9]{0,2})| "((0|(1[0-9]{0,2})|
(2(([0-4][0-9]?)|(5[0-5]?)|([6-9]?)))| (2(([0-4][0-9]?)|(5[0-5]?)|([6-9]?)))|
([3-9][0-9]?))\.){3} ([3-9][0-9]?))\.){3}
(0|(1[0-9]{0,2})| (0|(1[0-9]{0,2})|
(2(([0-4][0-9]?)|(5[0-5]?)|([6-9]?)))| (2(([0-4][0-9]?)|(5[0-5]?)|([6-9]?)))|
([3-9][0-9]?))" ([3-9][0-9]?))"/>
</xs:restriction> </xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType> </xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="ObjectIdentifier"> <xs:simpleType name="ObjectIdentifier">
<xs:restriction base="xs:string"> <xs:restriction base="xs:string">
<xs:pattern value= <xs:pattern value=
"(([0-1](\.[1-3]?[0-9]))| "(([0-1](\.[1-3]?[0-9]))|
(2\.(0|([1-9]\d*)))) (2\.(0|([1-9]\d*))))
(\.(0|([1-9]\d*))){0,126}"/> (\.(0|([1-9]\d*))){0,126}"/>
</xs:restriction> </xs:restriction>
skipping to change at page 11, line 7 skipping to change at page 11, line 7
5.2. OctetString 5.2. OctetString
This XSD datatype corresponds to the SMI "OCTET STRING" datatype. This XSD datatype corresponds to the SMI "OCTET STRING" datatype.
Several independent schemes for mapping SMI datatypes to XSD have Several independent schemes for mapping SMI datatypes to XSD have
used the XSD "string" type to represent "OCTET STRING", but this used the XSD "string" type to represent "OCTET STRING", but this
mapping does not conform to the requirements specified in this mapping does not conform to the requirements specified in this
document. Most notably, "string" cannot faithfully represent all document. Most notably, "string" cannot faithfully represent all
valid values (0 thru 255) that each octet in an "OCTET STRING" can valid values (0 thru 255) that each octet in an "OCTET STRING" can
have -- or at least cannot do so in a way that provides for ready have -- or at least cannot do so in a way that provides for easy
human readability of the resulting XML output. human readability of the resulting XML output.
Consequently, the XSD datatype "hexBinary" is specified as the Consequently, the XSD datatype "hexBinary" is specified as the
standard mapping of the SMI "OCTET STRING" datatype. In hexBinary, standard mapping of the SMI "OCTET STRING" datatype. In hexBinary,
each octet is encoded as two hexadecimal digits; the canonical each octet is encoded as two hexadecimal digits; the canonical
representation limits the set of allowed hexadecimal digits to 0-9 representation limits the set of allowed hexadecimal digits to 0-9
and uppercase A-F. and uppercase A-F.
The hexBinary representation of OCTET STRING complies with the The hexBinary representation of "OCTET STRING" complies with the
relevant requirements: relevant requirements:
o It covers all valid values for the corresponding SMI datatype. o It covers all valid values for the corresponding SMI datatype.
o It complies with the standard encoding rules associated with the o It complies with the standard encoding rules associated with the
corresponding SMI datatype. corresponding SMI datatype.
o With the "maxLength" restriction to 65535 octets, the XSD datatype o With the "maxLength" restriction to 65535 octets, the XSD datatype
specification matches the restrictions associated with the specification matches the restrictions associated with the
corresponding SMI datatype. corresponding SMI datatype.
skipping to change at page 11, line 43 skipping to change at page 11, line 43
XSD datatype is not optimal with respect to readability by humans; XSD datatype is not optimal with respect to readability by humans;
however, that is a consequence of the SMI datatype itself. Where however, that is a consequence of the SMI datatype itself. Where
human readability is more of a concern, it is likely that the human readability is more of a concern, it is likely that the
actual MIB objects in question will be represented by textual actual MIB objects in question will be represented by textual
conventions which limit the set of values that will be included in conventions which limit the set of values that will be included in
the OctetStrings and will, thus, bypass the hexBinary typing. the OctetStrings and will, thus, bypass the hexBinary typing.
5.3. Opaque 5.3. Opaque
The "hexBinary" XSD datatype is specified as the representation of The "hexBinary" XSD datatype is specified as the representation of
the SMI "Opague" datatype generally for the same reasons as the SMI "Opaque" datatype generally for the same reasons as
"hexBinary" is specified for the "OctetString" datatype: "hexBinary" is specified for the "OctetString" datatype:
o It covers all valid values for the corresponding SMI datatype. o It covers all valid values for the corresponding SMI datatype.
o It complies with the standard encoding rules associated with the o It complies with the standard encoding rules associated with the
corresponding SMI datatype. corresponding SMI datatype.
o There are no restriction issues associated with using "hexBinary" o There are no restriction issues associated with using "hexBinary"
for "Opague". for "Opaque".
o It is the most direct XSD datatype which exhibits the foregoing o It is the most direct XSD datatype which exhibits the foregoing
characteristics relative to the corresponding SMI datatype (which characteristics relative to the corresponding SMI datatype (which
must allow for any valid binary octet value). must allow for any valid binary octet value).
o The XML output produced from the canonical representation of this o The XML output produced from the canonical representation of this
XSD datatype is not optimal with respect to readability by humans; XSD datatype is not optimal with respect to readability by humans;
however, that is a consequence of the SMI datatype itself. however, that is a consequence of the SMI datatype itself.
Unmediated "Opague" data is intended for consumption by Unmediated "Opaque" data is intended for consumption by
applications, not humans. applications, not humans.
5.4. IpAddress 5.4. IpAddress
The XSD "string" datatype is the natural choice to represent an The XSD "string" datatype is the natural choice to represent an
IpAddress as XML output. The "pattern" restriction applied in this IpAddress as XML output. The "pattern" restriction applied in this
case results in a "dotted-decimal string of four values between "0" case results in a dotted-decimal string of four values between "0"
and "255" separated by a period (".") character. This pattern also and "255" separated by a period (".") character. This pattern also
precludes leading zeros. precludes leading zeros.
5.5. ObjectIdentifier 5.5. ObjectIdentifier
This XSD datatype corresponds to the SMI "OBJECT IDENTIFIER" This XSD datatype corresponds to the SMI "OBJECT IDENTIFIER"
datatype. datatype.
The XSD "string" datatype is also the natural choice to represent an The XSD "string" datatype is also the natural choice to represent an
ObjectIdentifier as XML output, for the same reasons as for the ObjectIdentifier as XML output, for the same reasons as for the
IpAddress choice. The "pattern" restriction applied in this case IpAddress choice. The "pattern" restriction applied in this case
results in a dotted-decimal string of up to 128 elements (referred to results in a dotted-decimal string of up to 128 elements (referred to
as "sub-ids"), each holding an "Unsigned32" integer value. as "sub-ids"), each holding an "Unsigned32" integer value.
Note that, while not mentioned in Sec. 7.1.3 of RFC 2578, due to the Note that, while not mentioned in Sec. 7.1.3 of RFC 2578, due to the
use of Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) Basic Encoding Rules use of Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) Basic Encoding Rules
(BER) the first two components of an "OBJECT IDENTIFIER" have limited (BER) the first two components of an "OBJECT IDENTIFIER" have limited
value ranges and are encoded into a single sub-id value [Steedman]. value ranges and are encoded into a single sub-id value [Steedman].
The ASN.1/BER standards specify that the numerical value of the first The ASN.1/BER standards specify that the numerical value of the first
sub-identifier is derived from the values of the first two object sub-identifier is derived from the values of the first two "OBJECT
identifier components in the object identifier value being encoded, IDENTIFIER" components in the value being encoded, using the formula:
using the formula: (X*40) + Y, where X is the value of the first (X*40) + Y, where X is the value of the first component and Y is the
object identifier component and Y is the value of the second object value of the second component. This packing of the first two
identifier component. This packing of the first two object components recognizes that only three values are allocated from the
identifier components recognizes that only three values are allocated root node, and at most 39 subsequent values from nodes reached by X =
from the root node, and at most 39 subsequent values from nodes 0 and X = 1. The minimum length of an "OBJECT IDENTIFIER" is two
reached by X = 0 and X = 1. The minimum length of an "OBJECT sub-ids (with a zero-valued "OBJECT IDENTIFIER" represented as
IDENTIFIER" is two sub-ids (with a zero-valued "OBJECT IDENTIFIER" "0.0"). No explicit "minLength" restriction (which would be "3" to
represented as "0.0"). No explicit "minLength" restriction (which allow for the minimum of two sub-ids and a single separating dot) is
would be "3" to allow for the minimum of two sub-ids and a single required, since the pattern itself enforces this restriction.
separating dot) is required, since the pattern itself enforces this
restriction.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
Security considerations for any given SMI MIB module are likely to be Security considerations for any given SMI MIB module are likely to be
relevant to any XSD/XML mapping of that MIB module; however, the relevant to any XSD/XML mapping of that MIB module; however, the
mapping defined in this document does not itself introduce any new mapping defined in this document does not itself introduce any new
security considerations. security considerations.
If and when proxies or gateways are developed to convey SNMP If and when proxies or gateways are developed to convey SNMP
management information from SNMP agents to XML-based management management information from SNMP agents to XML-based management
applications via XSD/XML mapping of MIB modules based on this applications via XSD/XML mapping of MIB modules based on this
specification and its planned siblings, special care will need to be specification and its planned siblings, special care will need to be
taken to ensure that all applicable SNMP security mechanisms are taken to ensure that all applicable SNMP security mechanisms are
supported in an appropriate manner yet to be determined. supported in an appropriate manner yet to be determined.
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
In accordance with RFC 3688, we will register namespaces and schemas In accordance with RFC 3688 [RFC3688], we request the following
for all three documents in this set with the IANA XML Registry. namespace and schema registrations associated with this document in
These entries -- corresponding to this base datatypes document and the IANA XML Registry:
the future textual conventions and MIB structure documents -- will be
as follows:
o urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:opsawg:smi:base:[version_id] o urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:opsawg:smi:base:[version_id]
o urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:opsawg:smi:base:[version_id] o urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:opsawg:smi:base:[version_id]
o urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:opsawg:smi:tc:[version_id]
o urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:opsawg:smi:tc:[version_id]
o urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:opsawg:smi:structure:[version_id]
o urn:ietf:params:xml:schema:opsawg:smi:structure:[version_id]
The following sub-sections refer to the present document only.
7.1. SMI Base Datatypes Namespace Registration 7.1. SMI Base Datatypes Namespace Registration
This document registers a URI for the SMI Base Datatypes XML This document registers a URI for the SMI Base Datatypes XML
namespace in the IETF XML registry. Following the format in RFC namespace in the IETF XML registry. Following the format in RFC
3688, IANA has made the following registration: 3688, IANA has made the following registration:
URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:opsawg:smi:base:1.0 URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:opsawg:smi:base:1.0
Registration Contact: The IESG. Registration Contact: The IESG.
skipping to change at page 16, line 15 skipping to change at page 15, line 15
8. Acknowledgements 8. Acknowledgements
Dave Harrington provided strategic and technical leadership to the Dave Harrington provided strategic and technical leadership to the
team which developed this particular specification. Yan Li did much team which developed this particular specification. Yan Li did much
of the research into existing approaches that was used as a baseline of the research into existing approaches that was used as a baseline
for the recommendations in this particular specification. for the recommendations in this particular specification.
This document owes much to draft-romascanu-netconf-datatypes-xx and This document owes much to draft-romascanu-netconf-datatypes-xx and
to many other sources (including libsmi and group discussions on the to many other sources (including libsmi and group discussions on the
NETCONF mailing lists) developed by those who have researched and NETCONF mailing lists) developed by those who have researched and
published candidate mappings of SMI datatypes and textual conventions published candidate mappings of SMI datatypes to XSD.
to XSD.
Individuals who participated in various discussions of this topic at Individuals who participated in various discussions of this topic at
IETF meetings and on IETF mailing lists include: Ray Atarashi, IETF meetings and on IETF mailing lists include: Ray Atarashi,
Yoshifumi Atarashi, Andy Bierman, Sharon Chisholm, Avri Doria, Mark Yoshifumi Atarashi, Andy Bierman, Sharon Chisholm, Avri Doria, Mark
Ellison, Rob Ennes, David Harrington, Alfred HInes, Eliot Lear, Chris Ellison, Rob Ennes, Mehmet Ersue, David Harrington, Alfred Hines,
Lonvick, Faye Ly, Randy Presuhn, Juergen Schoenwaelder, Andre Eliot Lear, Chris Lonvick, Faye Ly, Randy Presuhn, Juergen
Westerinen, and Bert Wijnen. Schoenwaelder, Andre Westerinen, and Bert Wijnen.
(Others who have been inadvertently omitted from this list should
notify the editor.)
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[RFC1155] Rose, M. and K. McCloghrie, "Structure and identification [RFC1155] Rose, M. and K. McCloghrie, "Structure and identification
of management information for TCP/IP-based internets", of management information for TCP/IP-based internets",
STD 16, RFC 1155, May 1990. STD 16, RFC 1155, May 1990.
[RFC2119] Bradner, s., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, s., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J. [RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J.
Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Structure of Management Information Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Structure of Management Information
Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April 1999. 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.
9.2. Informational References
[RFC3584] Frye, R., Levi, D., Routhier, S., and B. Wijnen, [RFC3584] Frye, R., Levi, D., Routhier, S., and B. Wijnen,
"Coexistence between Version 1, Version 2, and Version 3 "Coexistence between Version 1, Version 2, and Version 3
of the Internet-standard Network Management Framework", of the Internet-standard Network Management Framework",
BCP 74, RFC 3584, August 2003. BCP 74, RFC 3584, August 2003.
9.2. Informational References
[RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., and J. Schoenwaelder,
"Textual Conventions for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579,
April 1999.
[RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688,
January 2004. January 2004.
[Steedman] [Steedman]
Steedman, D., "ASN.1: The Tutorial and Reference". Steedman, D., "ASN.1: The Tutorial and Reference".
[ref.XML] World Wide Web Consortium, "Extensible Markup Language [XML] World Wide Web Consortium, "Extensible Markup Language
(XML) 1.0", W3C XML, February 1998, (XML) 1.0", W3C XML, February 1998,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210>. <http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210>.
[ref.XMLSchema] [XMLSchema]
World Wide Web Consortium, "XML Schema Part 1: Structures World Wide Web Consortium, "XML Schema Part 1: Structures
Second Edition", W3C XML Schema, October 2004, Second Edition", W3C XML Schema, October 2004,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/>. <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-1/>.
[ref.XSDDatatype] [XSDDatatypes]
World Wide Web Consortium, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes World Wide Web Consortium, "XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes
Second Edition", W3C XML Schema, October 2004, Second Edition", W3C XML Schema, October 2004,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/>. <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/>.
Appendix A. Open Issues
o Confirm IANA XML registration values and process.
Appendix B. Change Log
o -01 version:
* Incorporated mailing list comments on -00 version from Juergen
Schoenwaelder
* Incorporated mailing list comments on -00 version from David
Harrington
o -02 version:
* Fixed ObjectIdentifier pattern per correction from Juergen
Schoenwaelder, and text in sec. 5.5 adjusted accordingly.
* Moved non-normative references to Informational section per
David Harrington
* Tightened wording in to "XSD for SMI Datatypes" section per
Mark Ellison
* Added a note about Gauge32 and Counter32 application semantics
to the "Rationale" section per Mark Ellison
* Security section wording tightened per David Harrington
* The IANA Considerations section completed--will need
adjustment.
* Acknowledgments entries expanded and alphabetized
o -03 version:
* Corrected "ten" to "eleven" in opening sentence of "XSD for SMI
Datatypes" section.
* Removed conditional wording that previously prefaced the XSD
itself.
o -04 version:
* Relatively minor text fix-ups in various places, mainly in
response to comments on the -03 version from Mark Ellison,
Alfred HInes, Juergen Schoenwaelder, and David Harrington.
Author's Address Author's Address
Bob Natale Bob Natale
MITRE MITRE
7515 Colshire Dr 7515 Colshire Dr
MS H405 MS H405
McLean, VA 22102 McLean, VA 22102
USA USA
Phone: +1 703-983-2505 Phone: +1 703-983-2505
Email: rnatale@mitre.org Email: rnatale@mitre.org
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.
 End of changes. 39 change blocks. 
172 lines changed or deleted 122 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.35. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/