Movatterモバイル変換

[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

PROPOSED STANDARD

Network Working Group T. Nadeau, Ed.Request for Comments: 5542 BTCategory: Standards Track D. Zelig, Ed. Oversi O. Nicklass, Ed. RADVISION May 2009Definitions of Textual Conventions for Pseudowire (PW) ManagementStatus of This Memo This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject toBCP 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. This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other than English.Nadeau, et al. Standards Track [Page 1]

RFC 5542 TC for PW Management May 2009Abstract This memo defines a Management Information Base (MIB) module that contains textual conventions (TCs) to represent commonly used pseudowire (PW) management information. The intent is that these TCs will be imported and used in PW-related MIB modules that would otherwise define their own representations.Table of Contents1. Introduction ....................................................22. The Internet-Standard Management Framework ......................23. Conventions Used in This Document ...............................24. Object Definitions ..............................................35. Security Considerations .........................................96. IANA Considerations .............................................97. References .....................................................107.1. Normative References ......................................107.2. Informative References ....................................101. Introduction This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols in the Internet community. In particular, it defines textual conventions used for pseudowire (PW) technology and for Pseudowire Edge-to-Edge Emulation (PWE3) MIB modules.2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current Internet-Standard Management Framework, please refer tosection 7 of RFC 3410 [RFC3410]. Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed the Management Information Base or MIB. MIB objects are generally accessed through Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP). Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms defined in the Structure of Management Information (SMI). This memo specifies a MIB module that is compliant to the SMIv2, which is described in STD 58,RFC2578 [RFC2578], STD 58,RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58,RFC 2580 [RFC2580].3. Conventions Used in This Document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].Nadeau, et al. Standards Track [Page 2]

RFC 5542                  TC for PW Management                  May 20094.  Object Definitions   PW-TC-STD-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN   IMPORTS      MODULE-IDENTITY, Unsigned32, mib-2         FROM SNMPv2-SMI               -- [RFC2578]      TEXTUAL-CONVENTION         FROM SNMPv2-TC;               -- [RFC2579]   pwTcStdMIB MODULE-IDENTITY      LAST-UPDATED "200904210000Z"  -- 21 April 2009 00:00:00 GMT      ORGANIZATION "Pseudowire Edge-to-Edge Emulation (PWE3) Working                    Group"      CONTACT-INFO      " Thomas D. Nadeau        Email:  tom.nadeau@bt.com        David Zelig        Email: davidz@oversi.com        Orly Nicklass        Email: orlyn@radvision.com        The PWE3 Working Group (email distribution pwe3@ietf.org,http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/pwe3-charter.html)       "      DESCRIPTION         "This MIB module defines TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONS         for concepts used in pseudowire edge-to-edge         networks.         Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified         as authors of the code.  All rights reserved.         Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or         without modification, are permitted provided that the following         conditions are met:         - Redistributions of source code must retain the above           copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following           disclaimer.Nadeau, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 5542                  TC for PW Management                  May 2009         - Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above           copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following           disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials           provided with the distribution.         - Neither the name of Internet Society, IETF or IETF Trust, nor           the names of specific contributors, may be used to endorse or           promote products derived from this software without specific           prior written permission.         THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND         CONTRIBUTORS 'AS IS' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES,         INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF         MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE         DISCLAIMED.  IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR         CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,         SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT         NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES;         LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)         HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN         CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR         OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE,         EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.         This version of this MIB module is part ofRFC 5542;         see the RFC itself for full legal notices."      -- Revision history.      REVISION "200904210000Z"  -- 21 April 2009 00:00:00 GMT      DESCRIPTION           "Original Version"         ::= { mib-2 188 }   PwGroupID ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION      DISPLAY-HINT "d"      STATUS      current      DESCRIPTION           "An administrative identification for grouping a            set of service-specific pseudowire services."      SYNTAX  Unsigned32   PwIDType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION      DISPLAY-HINT "d"      STATUS      currentNadeau, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 5542 TC for PW Management May 2009 DESCRIPTION "Pseudowire Identifier. Used to identify the PW (together with some other fields) in the signaling session." SYNTAX Unsigned32 PwIndexType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Pseudowire Index. A unique value, greater than zero, for each locally defined PW. Used for indexing several MIB tables associated with the particular PW. It is recommended that values are assigned contiguously starting from 1. The value for each PW MUST remain constant at least from one re-initialization to the next re-initialization." SYNTAX Unsigned32 (1..4294967295) PwIndexOrZeroType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS current DESCRIPTION "This TEXTUAL-CONVENTION is an extension of the PwIndexType convention. The latter defines a greater- than-zero value used to identify a pseudowire in the managed system. This extension permits the additional value of zero. The zero value is object-specific and MUST therefore be defined as part of the description of any object that uses this syntax. Examples of the usage of zero might include situations where pseudowire was unknown, or where none or all pseudowires need to be referenced." SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..4294967295) PwOperStatusTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Indicates the operational status of the PW. - up(1): Ready to pass packets. - down(2): PW signaling is not yet finished, or indications available at the service level indicate that the PW is not passing packets. - testing(3): AdminStatus at the PW level is set to test.Nadeau, et al. Standards Track [Page 5]

RFC 5542                  TC for PW Management                  May 2009        - dormant(4):        The PW is not in a condition to pass                             packets but is in a 'pending' state,                             waiting for some external event.        - notPresent(5):     Some component is missing to accomplish                             the setup of the PW.  It can be                             configuration error, incomplete                             configuration, or a missing H/W component.        - lowerLayerDown(6): One or more of the lower-layer interfaces                             responsible for running the underlying PSN                             is not in OperStatus 'up' state."    SYNTAX   INTEGER {        up(1),        down(2),        testing(3),        dormant(4),        notPresent(5),        lowerLayerDown(6)        }   PwAttachmentIdentifierType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION      STATUS      current      DESCRIPTION         "An octet string used in the generalized Forward Error          Correction (FEC) element for identifying attachment forwarder          and groups.  A NULL identifier is of zero length.         "     SYNTAX    OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..255))   PwGenIdType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION      STATUS      current      DESCRIPTION         "Represents the Attachment Group Identifier (AGI) Type and          Attachment Individual Identifier (AII) Type in generalized FEC          signaling and configuration.         "     SYNTAX    Unsigned32( 0..254 )   PwCwStatusTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION      STATUS      current      DESCRIPTION         "Indicates the status of the control word (CW) negotiation          based on the local configuration and the indications received          from the peer node.          waitingForNextMsg(1) indicates that the node is waiting for          another label mapping from the peer.Nadeau, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 5542                  TC for PW Management                  May 2009          sentWrongBitErrorCode(2) indicates that the local node has          notified the peer about a mismatch in the C-bit.          rxWithdrawWithWrongBitErrorCode(3) indicates that a withdraw          message has been received with the wrong C-bit error code.          illegalReceivedBit(4) indicates a C-bit configuration with          the peer that is not compatible with the PW type.          cwPresent(5) indicates that the CW is present for this PW.          If signaling is used, the C-bit is set and agreed upon between          the nodes.  For manually configured PW, the local          configuration requires the use of the CW.          cwNotPresent(6) indicates that the CW is not present for this          PW.  If signaling is used, the C-bit is reset and agreed upon          between the nodes.  For manually configured PW, the local          configuration requires that the CW not be used.          notYetKnown(7) indicates that a label mapping has not yet          been received from the peer.         "      REFERENCE         "Martini, et al., 'Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance Using          the Label Distribution Protocol', [RFC4447]."      SYNTAX    INTEGER {                 waitingForNextMsg(1),                 sentWrongBitErrorCode(2),                 rxWithdrawWithWrongBitErrorCode(3),                 illegalReceivedBit(4),                 cwPresent(5),                 cwNotPresent(6),                 notYetKnown(7)                 }   PwStatus ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION      STATUS      current      DESCRIPTION         "Indicates the status of the PW and the interfaces affecting          this PW.  If none of the bits are set, it indicates no faults          are reported.         "Nadeau, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 7]

RFC 5542                  TC for PW Management                  May 2009      SYNTAX   BITS {        pwNotForwarding(0),        servicePwRxFault(1),        servicePwTxFault(2),        psnPwRxFault(3),        psnPwTxFault(4)        }   PwFragSize ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION      DISPLAY-HINT "d"      STATUS      current      DESCRIPTION         "If set to a value other than zero, it indicates the desired          fragmentation length in bytes.  If set to zero,          fragmentation is not desired for PSN bound packets.         "      SYNTAX   Unsigned32   PwFragStatus ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION      STATUS      current      DESCRIPTION         "Indicates the status of the fragmentation/reassembly process          based on local configuration and peer capability.          noFrag(0) bit indicates that local configuration is for no          fragmentation.          cfgFragGreaterThanPsnMtu(1) bit indicates that the local node          is set to fragment, but the fragmentation size is greater          than the MTU available at the PSN between the nodes.          Fragmentation is not done in this case.          cfgFragButRemoteIncapable(2) bit indicates that the local          configuration conveys the desire for fragmentation but          the peer is not capable of reassembly.          remoteFragCapable(3) bit indicates that the remote node          is capable to accept fragmented PDUs.          fragEnabled(4) bit indicates that fragmentation will be used          on this PW.  Fragmentation can be used if the local node was          configured for fragmentation, the peer has the capability          to accept fragmented packets, and the CW is in use for this          PW."      REFERENCE          "Malis, A. and M. Townsley, 'Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-           Edge (PWE3) Fragmentation and Reassembly', [RFC4623]."Nadeau, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 8]

RFC 5542                  TC for PW Management                  May 2009      SYNTAX   BITS {         noFrag(0),         cfgFragGreaterThanPsnMtu(1),         cfgFragButRemoteIncapable(2),         remoteFragCapable(3),         fragEnabled(4)         }   PwCfgIndexOrzero ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION      DISPLAY-HINT "d"      STATUS      current      DESCRIPTION           "Index in any of the relevant configuration tables for           supplement information regarding configuration of the           specific technology.  Value zero implies no additional           configuration information is applicable."      SYNTAX  Unsigned32 (0..4294967295)   END5.  Security Considerations   This module does not define any management objects.  Instead, it   defines a set of textual conventions that may be used by other PWE3   MIB modules to define management objects.   Meaningful security considerations can only be written in the MIB   modules that define management objects.  Therefore, this document has   no impact on the security of the Internet.6.  IANA Considerations   The MIB module in this document uses the following IANA-assigned   OBJECT IDENTIFIER value recorded in the SMI Numbers registry:         Descriptor        OBJECT IDENTIFIER value         ----------        -----------------------         pwTcStdMIB         { mib-2 188 }Nadeau, et al.              Standards Track                     [Page 9]

RFC 5542                  TC for PW Management                  May 20097.  References7.1.  Normative References   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate              Requirement Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119, March 1997.   [RFC2578]  McCloghrie, K., 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.   [RFC4447]  Martini, L., Ed., Rosen, E., El-Aawar, N., Smith, T., and              G. Heron, "Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance Using the              Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)",RFC 4447, April 2006.   [RFC4623]  Malis, A. and M. Townsley, "Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-              Edge (PWE3) Fragmentation and Reassembly",RFC 4623,              August 2006.7.2.  Informative References   [RFC3410]  Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart,              "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet-              Standard Management Framework",RFC 3410, December 2002.Nadeau, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 10]

RFC 5542                  TC for PW Management                  May 2009Authors' Addresses   Thomas D. Nadeau (editor)   BT   BT Centre   81 Newgate Street   London  EC1A 7AJ   United Kingdom   EMail: tom.nadeau@bt.com   David Zelig (editor)   Oversi Networks   1 Rishon Letzion St.   Petah Tikva   Israel   Phone: +972 77 3337 750   EMail: davidz@oversi.com   Orly Nicklass (editor)   RADVISION   24 Raul Wallenberg   Tel Aviv   Phone: +972 3 776 9444   EMail: orlyn@radvision.comNadeau, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 11]

[8]ページ先頭