RFC 4802
Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering Management Information Base
Pages: 60
Proposed Standard
Proposed Standard
Part 3 of 3 – Pages 37 to 60
gmplsTunnelErrorLastTime OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX TimeStamp
MAX-ACCESS read-only
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The time at which the last error occurred. This is presented as
the value of SysUpTime when the error occurred or was reported
to this node.
If gmplsTunnelErrorLastErrorType has the value noError(0), then
this object is not valid and should be ignored.
Note that entries in this table are not persistent over system
resets or re-initializations of the management system."
::= { gmplsTunnelErrorEntry 2 }
gmplsTunnelErrorReporterType OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX InetAddressType
MAX-ACCESS read-only
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The address type of the error reported.
This object is used to aid in interpretation of
gmplsTunnelErrorReporter."
::= { gmplsTunnelErrorEntry 3 }
gmplsTunnelErrorReporter OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX InetAddress
MAX-ACCESS read-only
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The address of the node reporting the last error, or the address
of the resource (such as an interface) associated with the
error.
If gmplsTunnelErrorLastErrorType has the value noError(0), then
this object is not valid and should be ignored.
If gmplsTunnelErrorLastErrorType has the value unknown(1),
localConfiguration(4), localResources(5), or localOther(6),
this object MAY contain a zero value.
This object should be interpreted in the context of the value of
the object gmplsTunnelErrorReporterType."
REFERENCE
"1. Textual Conventions for Internet Network Addresses, RFC 4001,
section 4, Usage Hints."
::= { gmplsTunnelErrorEntry 4 }
gmplsTunnelErrorCode OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX Unsigned32
MAX-ACCESS read-only
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The primary error code associated with the last error.
The interpretation of this error code depends on the value of
gmplsTunnelErrorLastErrorType. If the value of
gmplsTunnelErrorLastErrorType is noError(0), the value of this
object should be 0 and should be ignored. If the value of
gmplsTunnelErrorLastErrorType is protocol(2), the error should
be interpreted in the context of the signaling protocol
identified by the mplsTunnelSignallingProto object."
REFERENCE
"1. Resource ReserVation Protocol -- Version 1 Functional
Specification, RFC 2205, section B.
2. RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels, RFC 3209,
section 7.3.
3. Generalized MPLS Signaling - RSVP-TE Extensions, RFC 3473,
section 13.1."
::= { gmplsTunnelErrorEntry 5 }
gmplsTunnelErrorSubcode OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX Unsigned32
MAX-ACCESS read-only
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The secondary error code associated with the last error and the
protocol used to signal this tunnel. This value is interpreted
in the context of the value of gmplsTunnelErrorCode.
If the value of gmplsTunnelErrorLastErrorType is noError(0), the
value of this object should be 0 and should be ignored."
REFERENCE
"1. Resource ReserVation Protocol -- Version 1 Functional
Specification, RFC 2205, section B.
2. RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels, RFC 3209,
section 7.3.
3. Generalized MPLS Signaling - RSVP-TE Extensions, RFC 3473,
section 13.1. "
::= { gmplsTunnelErrorEntry 6 }
gmplsTunnelErrorTLVs OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE(0..65535))
MAX-ACCESS read-only
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The sequence of interface identifier TLVs reported with the
error by the protocol code. The interpretation of the TLVs and
the encoding within the protocol are described in the
references. A value of zero in the first octet indicates that no
TLVs are present."
REFERENCE
"1. Generalized MPLS Signaling - RSVP-TE Extensions, RFC 3473,
section 8.2."
::= { gmplsTunnelErrorEntry 7 }
gmplsTunnelErrorHelpString OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX SnmpAdminString
MAX-ACCESS read-only
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"A textual string containing information about the last error,
recovery actions, and support advice. If there is no help string,
this object contains a zero length string.
If the value of gmplsTunnelErrorLastErrorType is noError(0),
this object should contain a zero length string, but may contain
a help string indicating that there is no error."
::= { gmplsTunnelErrorEntry 8 }
--
-- Notifications
--
gmplsTunnelDown NOTIFICATION-TYPE
OBJECTS {
mplsTunnelAdminStatus,
mplsTunnelOperStatus,
gmplsTunnelErrorLastErrorType,
gmplsTunnelErrorReporterType,
gmplsTunnelErrorReporter,
gmplsTunnelErrorCode,
gmplsTunnelErrorSubcode
}
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"This notification is generated when an mplsTunnelOperStatus
object for a tunnel in the gmplsTunnelTable is about to enter
the down state from some other state (but not from the
notPresent state). This other state is indicated by the
included value of mplsTunnelOperStatus.
The objects in this notification provide additional error
information that indicates the reason why the tunnel has
transitioned to down(2).
Note that an implementation MUST only issue one of
mplsTunnelDown and gmplsTunnelDown for any single event on a
single tunnel. If the tunnel has an entry in the
gmplsTunnelTable, an implementation SHOULD use gmplsTunnelDown
for all tunnel-down events and SHOULD NOT use mplsTunnelDown.
This notification is subject to the control of
mplsTunnelNotificationEnable. When that object is set
to false(2), then the notification must not be issued.
Further, this notification is also subject to
mplsTunnelNotificationMaxRate. That object indicates the
maximum number of notifications issued per second. If events
occur more rapidly, the implementation may simply fail to emit
some notifications during that period, or may queue them until
an appropriate time. The notification rate applies to the sum
of all notifications in the MPLS-TE-STD-MIB and
GMPLS-TE-STD-MIB modules applied across the whole of the
reporting device.
mplsTunnelOperStatus, mplsTunnelAdminStatus, mplsTunnelDown,
mplsTunnelNotificationEnable, and mplsTunnelNotificationMaxRate
objects are found in MPLS-TE-STD-MIB."
REFERENCE
"1. Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering
(TE) Management Information Base (MIB), RFC 3812."
::= { gmplsTeNotifications 1 }
gmplsTeGroups
OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { gmplsTeConformance 1 }
gmplsTeCompliances
OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { gmplsTeConformance 2 }
-- Compliance requirement for fully compliant implementations.
gmplsTeModuleFullCompliance MODULE-COMPLIANCE
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Compliance statement for agents that provide full support for
GMPLS-TE-STD-MIB. Such devices can then be monitored and also
be configured using this MIB module.
The mandatory group has to be implemented by all LSRs that
originate, terminate, or act as transit for TE-LSPs/tunnels.
In addition, depending on the type of tunnels supported, other
groups become mandatory as explained below."
MODULE MPLS-TE-STD-MIB -- The MPLS-TE-STD-MIB, RFC 3812
MANDATORY-GROUPS {
mplsTunnelGroup,
mplsTunnelScalarGroup
}
MODULE -- this module
MANDATORY-GROUPS {
gmplsTunnelGroup,
gmplsTunnelScalarGroup
}
GROUP gmplsTunnelSignaledGroup
DESCRIPTION
"This group is mandatory for devices that support signaled
tunnel set up, in addition to gmplsTunnelGroup. The following
constraints apply:
mplsTunnelSignallingProto should be at least read-only
returning a value of ldp(2) or rsvp(3)."
GROUP gmplsTunnelOptionalGroup
DESCRIPTION
"Objects in this group are optional."
GROUP gmplsTeNotificationGroup
DESCRIPTION
"This group is mandatory for those implementations that can
implement the notifications contained in this group."
::= { gmplsTeCompliances 1 }
-- Compliance requirement for read-only compliant implementations.
gmplsTeModuleReadOnlyCompliance MODULE-COMPLIANCE
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Compliance requirement for implementations that only provide
read-only support for GMPLS-TE-STD-MIB. Such devices can then be
monitored but cannot be configured using this MIB module."
MODULE -- this module
-- The mandatory group has to be implemented by all LSRs that
-- originate, terminate, or act as transit for TE-LSPs/tunnels.
-- In addition, depending on the type of tunnels supported, other
-- groups become mandatory as explained below.
MANDATORY-GROUPS {
gmplsTunnelGroup,
gmplsTunnelScalarGroup
}
GROUP gmplsTunnelSignaledGroup
DESCRIPTION
"This group is mandatory for devices that support signaled
tunnel set up, in addition to gmplsTunnelGroup. The following
constraints apply:
mplsTunnelSignallingProto should be at least read-only
returning a value of ldp(2) or rsvp(3)."
GROUP gmplsTunnelOptionalGroup
DESCRIPTION
"Objects in this group are optional."
GROUP gmplsTeNotificationGroup
DESCRIPTION
"This group is mandatory for those implementations that can
implement the notifications contained in this group."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelUnnumIf
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelAttributes
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelLSPEncoding
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelSwitchingType
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelLinkProtection
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelGPid
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelSecondary
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelDirection
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Only forward(0) is required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelPathComp
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Only explicit(2) is required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelUpstreamNotifyRecipientType
SYNTAX InetAddressType { unknown(0), ipv4(1), ipv6(2) }
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION "Only unknown(0), ipv4(1), and ipv6(2) support
is required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelUpstreamNotifyRecipient
SYNTAX InetAddress (SIZE(0|4|16))
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION "An implementation is only required to support
unknown(0), ipv4(1), and ipv6(2) sizes."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelSendResvNotifyRecipientType
SYNTAX InetAddressType { unknown(0), ipv4(1), ipv6(2) }
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION "Only unknown(0), ipv4(1), and ipv6(2) support
is required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelSendResvNotifyRecipient
SYNTAX InetAddress (SIZE(0|4|16))
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION "An implementation is only required to support
unknown(0), ipv4(1), and ipv6(2) sizes."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelDownstreamNotifyRecipientType
SYNTAX InetAddressType { unknown(0), ipv4(1), ipv6(2) }
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION "Only unknown(0), ipv4(1), and ipv6(2) support
is required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelDownstreamNotifyRecipient
SYNTAX InetAddress (SIZE(0|4|16))
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION "An implementation is only required to support
unknown(0), ipv4(1), and ipv6(2) sizes."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelSendPathNotifyRecipientType
SYNTAX InetAddressType { unknown(0), ipv4(1), ipv6(2) }
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION "Only unknown(0), ipv4(1), and ipv6(2) support
is required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelSendPathNotifyRecipient
SYNTAX InetAddress (SIZE(0|4|16))
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION "An implementation is only required to support
unknown(0), ipv4(1), and ipv6(2) sizes."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelAdminStatusFlags
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelExtraParamsPtr
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
-- gmplsTunnelHopLabelStatuses has max access read-only
OBJECT gmplsTunnelHopExplicitForwardLabel
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelHopExplicitForwardLabelPtr
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelHopExplicitReverseLabel
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelHopExplicitReverseLabelPtr
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
-- gmplsTunnelARHopTable
-- all objects have max access read-only
-- gmplsTunnelCHopTable
-- all objects have max access read-only
-- gmplsTunnelReversePerfTable
-- all objects have max access read-only
-- gmplsTunnelErrorTable
-- all objects have max access read-only
OBJECT gmplsTunnelErrorReporterType
SYNTAX InetAddressType { unknown(0), ipv4(1), ipv6(2) }
DESCRIPTION "Only unknown(0), ipv4(1), and ipv6(2) support
is required."
OBJECT gmplsTunnelErrorReporter
SYNTAX InetAddress (SIZE(0|4|16))
DESCRIPTION "An implementation is only required to support
unknown(0), ipv4(1), and ipv6(2)."
::= { gmplsTeCompliances 2 }
gmplsTunnelGroup OBJECT-GROUP
OBJECTS {
gmplsTunnelDirection,
gmplsTunnelReversePerfPackets,
gmplsTunnelReversePerfHCPackets,
gmplsTunnelReversePerfErrors,
gmplsTunnelReversePerfBytes,
gmplsTunnelReversePerfHCBytes,
gmplsTunnelErrorLastErrorType,
gmplsTunnelErrorLastTime,
gmplsTunnelErrorReporterType,
gmplsTunnelErrorReporter,
gmplsTunnelErrorCode,
gmplsTunnelErrorSubcode,
gmplsTunnelErrorTLVs,
gmplsTunnelErrorHelpString,
gmplsTunnelUnnumIf
}
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Necessary, but not sufficient, set of objects to implement
tunnels. In addition, depending on the type of the tunnels
supported (for example, manually configured or signaled,
persistent or non-persistent, etc.), the
gmplsTunnelSignaledGroup group is mandatory."
::= { gmplsTeGroups 1 }
gmplsTunnelSignaledGroup OBJECT-GROUP
OBJECTS {
gmplsTunnelAttributes,
gmplsTunnelLSPEncoding,
gmplsTunnelSwitchingType,
gmplsTunnelLinkProtection,
gmplsTunnelGPid,
gmplsTunnelSecondary,
gmplsTunnelPathComp,
gmplsTunnelUpstreamNotifyRecipientType,
gmplsTunnelUpstreamNotifyRecipient,
gmplsTunnelSendResvNotifyRecipientType,
gmplsTunnelSendResvNotifyRecipient,
gmplsTunnelDownstreamNotifyRecipientType,
gmplsTunnelDownstreamNotifyRecipient,
gmplsTunnelSendPathNotifyRecipientType,
gmplsTunnelSendPathNotifyRecipient,
gmplsTunnelAdminStatusFlags,
gmplsTunnelHopLabelStatuses,
gmplsTunnelHopExplicitForwardLabel,
gmplsTunnelHopExplicitForwardLabelPtr,
gmplsTunnelHopExplicitReverseLabel,
gmplsTunnelHopExplicitReverseLabelPtr
}
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Objects needed to implement signaled tunnels."
::= { gmplsTeGroups 2 }
gmplsTunnelScalarGroup OBJECT-GROUP
OBJECTS {
gmplsTunnelsConfigured,
gmplsTunnelsActive
}
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Scalar objects needed to implement MPLS tunnels."
::= { gmplsTeGroups 3 }
gmplsTunnelOptionalGroup OBJECT-GROUP
OBJECTS {
gmplsTunnelExtraParamsPtr,
gmplsTunnelARHopLabelStatuses,
gmplsTunnelARHopExplicitForwardLabel,
gmplsTunnelARHopExplicitForwardLabelPtr,
gmplsTunnelARHopExplicitReverseLabel,
gmplsTunnelARHopExplicitReverseLabelPtr,
gmplsTunnelARHopProtection,
gmplsTunnelCHopLabelStatuses,
gmplsTunnelCHopExplicitForwardLabel,
gmplsTunnelCHopExplicitForwardLabelPtr,
gmplsTunnelCHopExplicitReverseLabel,
gmplsTunnelCHopExplicitReverseLabelPtr
}
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The objects in this group are optional."
::= { gmplsTeGroups 4 }
gmplsTeNotificationGroup NOTIFICATION-GROUP
NOTIFICATIONS {
gmplsTunnelDown
}
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Set of notifications implemented in this module. None is
mandatory."
::= { gmplsTeGroups 5 }
END
9. Security Considerations
It is clear that the MIB modules described in this document in
association with MPLS-TE-STD-MIB [RFC3812] are potentially useful for
monitoring of MPLS and GMPLS tunnels. These MIB modules can also be
used for configuration of certain objects, and anything that can be
configured can be incorrectly configured, with potentially disastrous
results.
There are a number of management objects defined in these MIB modules
with a MAX-ACCESS clause of read-write and/or read-create. Such
objects may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network
environments. The support for SET operations in a non-secure
environment without proper protection can have a negative effect on
network operations. These are the tables and objects and their
sensitivity/vulnerability:
o the gmplsTunnelTable and gmplsTunnelHopTable collectively contain
objects to provision GMPLS tunnels interfaces at their ingress
LSRs. Unauthorized write access to objects in these tables could
result in disruption of traffic on the network. This is
especially true if a tunnel has already been established.
Some of the readable objects in these MIB modules (i.e., objects with
a MAX-ACCESS other than not-accessible) may be considered sensitive
or vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus important to
control even GET and/or NOTIFY access to these objects and possibly
to even encrypt the values of these objects when sending them over
the network via SNMP. These are the tables and objects and their
sensitivity/vulnerability:
o the gmplsTunnelTable, gmplsTunnelHopTable, gmplsTunnelARHopTable,
gmplsTunnelCHopTable, gmplsTunnelReversePerfTable, and
gmplsTunnelErrorTable collectively show the tunnel network
topology and status. If an administrator does not want to reveal
this information, then these tables should be considered
sensitive/vulnerable.
SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 did not include adequate security.
Even if the network itself is secure (for example by using IPsec),
even then, there is no control as to who on the secure network is
allowed to access and GET/SET (read/change/create/delete) the objects
in these MIB modules.
It is RECOMMENDED that implementers consider the security features as
provided by the SNMPv3 framework (see [RFC3410], section 8),
including full support for the SNMPv3 cryptographic mechanisms (for
authentication and privacy).
Further, deployment of SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 is NOT
RECOMMENDED. Instead, it is RECOMMENDED to deploy SNMPv3 and to
enable cryptographic security. It is then a customer/operator
responsibility to ensure that the SNMP entity giving access to an
instance of this MIB module, is properly configured to give access to
the objects only to those principals (users) that have legitimate
rights to indeed GET or SET (change/create/delete) them.
10. Acknowledgments
This document is a product of the CCAMP Working Group.
This document extends [RFC3812]. The authors would like to express
their gratitude to all those who worked on that earlier MIB document.
Thanks also to Tony Zinicola and Jeremy Crossen for their valuable
contributions during an early implementation, and to Lars Eggert,
Baktha Muralidharan, Tom Petch, Dan Romascanu, Dave Thaler, and Bert Wijnen for their review comments. Special thanks to Joan Cucchiara and Len Nieman for their help with compilation issues. Joan Cucchiara provided a helpful and very thorough MIB Doctor review.11. IANA Considerations
IANA has rooted MIB objects in the MIB modules contained in this document according to the sections below.11.1. IANA Considerations for GMPLS-TE-STD-MIB
IANA has rooted MIB objects in the GMPLS-TE-STD-MIB module contained in this document under the mplsStdMIB subtree. IANA has made the following assignments in the "NETWORK MANAGEMENT PARAMETERS" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/ smi-numbers in table: ...mib-2.transmission.mplsStdMIB (1.3.6.1.2.1.10.166) Decimal Name References ------- ----- ---------- 13 GMPLS-TE-STD-MIB [RFC4802] In the future, GMPLS-related standards-track MIB modules should be rooted under the mplsStdMIB (sic) subtree. IANA has been requested to manage that namespace in the SMI Numbers registry [RFC3811]. New assignments can only be made via a Standards Action as specified in [RFC2434].11.2. Dependence on IANA MIB Modules
Three MIB objects in the GMPLS-TE-STD-MIB module defined in this document (gmplsTunnelLSPEncoding, gmplsTunnelSwitchingType, and gmplsTunnelGPid) use textual conventions imported from the IANA- GMPLS-TC-MIB module. The purpose of defining these textual conventions in a separate MIB module is to allow additional values to be defined without having to issue a new version of this document. The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) is responsible for the assignment of all Internet numbers; it will administer the values associated with these textual conventions.
The rules for additions or changes to IANA-GMPLS-TC-MIB are outlined in the DESCRIPTION clause associated with its MODULE-IDENTITY statement. The current version of IANA-GMPLS-TC-MIB can be accessed from the IANA home page at: http://www.iana.org/.11.2.1. IANA-GMPLS-TC-MIB Definition
This section provides the base definition of the IANA GMPLS TC MIB module. This MIB module is under the direct control of IANA. Please see the most updated version of this MIB at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib>. This MIB makes reference to the following documents: [RFC2578], [RFC2579], [RFC3471], [RFC3473], [RFC4202], [RFC4328], and [RFC4783]. IANA assigned an OID to the IANA-GMPLS-TC-MIB module specified in this document as { mib-2 152 }. IANA-GMPLS-TC-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN IMPORTS MODULE-IDENTITY, mib-2 FROM SNMPv2-SMI -- RFC 2578 TEXTUAL-CONVENTION FROM SNMPv2-TC; -- RFC 2579 ianaGmpls MODULE-IDENTITY LAST-UPDATED "200702270000Z" -- 27 February 2007 00:00:00 GMT ORGANIZATION "IANA" CONTACT-INFO "Internet Assigned Numbers Authority Postal: 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 Tel: +1 310 823 9358 E-Mail: iana@iana.org" DESCRIPTION "Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). The initial version of this MIB module was published in RFC 4802. For full legal notices see the RFC itself. Supplementary information may be available on: http://www.ietf.org/copyrights/ianamib.html" REVISION "200702270000Z" -- 27 February 2007 00:00:00 GMT DESCRIPTION "Initial version issued as part of RFC 4802."
::= { mib-2 152 }
IANAGmplsLSPEncodingTypeTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"This type is used to represent and control
the LSP encoding type of an LSP signaled by a GMPLS
signaling protocol.
This textual convention is strongly tied to the LSP
Encoding Types sub-registry of the GMPLS Signaling
Parameters registry managed by IANA. Values should be
assigned by IANA in step with the LSP Encoding Types
sub-registry and using the same registry management rules.
However, the actual values used in this textual convention
are solely within the purview of IANA and do not
necessarily match the values in the LSP Encoding Types
sub-registry.
The definition of this textual convention with the
addition of newly assigned values is published
periodically by the IANA, in either the Assigned
Numbers RFC, or some derivative of it specific to
Internet Network Management number assignments. (The
latest arrangements can be obtained by contacting the
IANA.)
Requests for new values should be made to IANA via
email (iana@iana.org)."
REFERENCE
"1. Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
Signaling Functional Description, RFC 3471, section
3.1.1.
2. Generalized MPLS Signalling Extensions for G.709 Optical
Transport Networks Control, RFC 4328, section 3.1.1."
SYNTAX INTEGER {
tunnelLspNotGmpls(0), -- GMPLS is not in use
tunnelLspPacket(1), -- Packet
tunnelLspEthernet(2), -- Ethernet
tunnelLspAnsiEtsiPdh(3), -- PDH
-- the value 4 is deprecated
tunnelLspSdhSonet(5), -- SDH or SONET
-- the value 6 is deprecated
tunnelLspDigitalWrapper(7), -- Digital Wrapper
tunnelLspLambda(8), -- Lambda
tunnelLspFiber(9), -- Fiber
-- the value 10 is deprecated
tunnelLspFiberChannel(11), -- Fiber Channel
tunnelDigitalPath(12), -- Digital Path
tunnelOpticalChannel(13) -- Optical Channel
}
IANAGmplsSwitchingTypeTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"This type is used to represent and
control the LSP switching type of an LSP signaled by a
GMPLS signaling protocol.
This textual convention is strongly tied to the Switching
Types sub-registry of the GMPLS Signaling Parameters
registry managed by IANA. Values should be assigned by
IANA in step with the Switching Types sub-registry and
using the same registry management rules. However, the
actual values used in this textual convention are solely
within the purview of IANA and do not necessarily match
the values in the Switching Types sub-registry.
The definition of this textual convention with the
addition of newly assigned values is published
periodically by the IANA, in either the Assigned
Numbers RFC, or some derivative of it specific to
Internet Network Management number assignments. (The
latest arrangements can be obtained by contacting the
IANA.)
Requests for new values should be made to IANA via
email (iana@iana.org)."
REFERENCE
"1. Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized
Multi-Protocol Label Switching, RFC 4202, section 2.4.
2. Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
Signaling Functional Description, RFC 3471, section
3.1.1."
SYNTAX INTEGER {
unknown(0), -- none of the following, or not known
psc1(1), -- Packet-Switch-Capable 1
psc2(2), -- Packet-Switch-Capable 2
psc3(3), -- Packet-Switch-Capable 3
psc4(4), -- Packet-Switch-Capable 4
l2sc(51), -- Layer-2-Switch-Capable
tdm(100), -- Time-Division-Multiplex
lsc(150), -- Lambda-Switch-Capable
fsc(200) -- Fiber-Switch-Capable
}
IANAGmplsGeneralizedPidTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"This data type is used to represent and control the LSP
Generalized Protocol Identifier (G-PID) of an LSP
signaled by a GMPLS signaling protocol.
This textual convention is strongly tied to the Generalized
PIDs (G-PID) sub-registry of the GMPLS Signaling Parameters
registry managed by IANA. Values should be assigned by
IANA in step with the Generalized PIDs (G-PID) sub-registry
and using the same registry management rules. However, the
actual values used in this textual convention are solely
within the purview of IANA and do not necessarily match the
values in the Generalized PIDs (G-PID) sub-registry.
The definition of this textual convention with the
addition of newly assigned values is published
periodically by the IANA, in either the Assigned
Numbers RFC, or some derivative of it specific to
Internet Network Management number assignments. (The
latest arrangements can be obtained by contacting the
IANA.)
Requests for new values should be made to IANA via
email (iana@iana.org)."
REFERENCE
"1. Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
Signaling Functional Description, RFC 3471, section
3.1.1.
2. Generalized MPLS Signalling Extensions for G.709 Optical
Transport Networks Control, RFC 4328, section 3.1.3."
SYNTAX INTEGER {
unknown(0), -- unknown or none of the following
-- the values 1, 2, 3 and 4 are reserved in RFC 3471
asynchE4(5),
asynchDS3T3(6),
asynchE3(7),
bitsynchE3(8),
bytesynchE3(9),
asynchDS2T2(10),
bitsynchDS2T2(11),
reservedByRFC3471first(12),
asynchE1(13),
bytesynchE1(14),
bytesynch31ByDS0(15),
asynchDS1T1(16),
bitsynchDS1T1(17),
bytesynchDS1T1(18),
vc1vc12(19),
reservedByRFC3471second(20),
reservedByRFC3471third(21),
ds1SFAsynch(22),
ds1ESFAsynch(23),
ds3M23Asynch(24),
ds3CBitParityAsynch(25),
vtLovc(26),
stsSpeHovc(27),
posNoScramble16BitCrc(28),
posNoScramble32BitCrc(29),
posScramble16BitCrc(30),
posScramble32BitCrc(31),
atm(32),
ethernet(33),
sdhSonet(34),
digitalwrapper(36),
lambda(37),
ansiEtsiPdh(38),
lapsSdh(40),
fddi(41),
dqdb(42),
fiberChannel3(43),
hdlc(44),
ethernetV2DixOnly(45),
ethernet802dot3Only(46),
g709ODUj(47),
g709OTUk(48),
g709CBRorCBRa(49),
g709CBRb(50),
g709BSOT(51),
g709BSNT(52),
gfpIPorPPP(53),
gfpEthernetMAC(54),
gfpEthernetPHY(55),
g709ESCON(56),
g709FICON(57),
g709FiberChannel(58)
}
IANAGmplsAdminStatusInformationTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"This data type determines the setting of the
Admin Status flags in the Admin Status object or TLV, as
described in RFC 3471. Setting this object to a non-zero
value will result in the inclusion of the Admin Status
object or TLV on signaling messages.
This textual convention is strongly tied to the
Administrative Status Information Flags sub-registry of
the GMPLS Signaling Parameters registry managed by IANA.
Values should be assigned by IANA in step with the
Administrative Status Flags sub-registry and using the
same registry management rules. However, the actual
values used in this textual convention are solely
within the purview of IANA and do not necessarily match
the values in the Administrative Status Information
Flags sub-registry.
The definition of this textual convention with the
addition of newly assigned values is published
periodically by the IANA, in either the Assigned
Numbers RFC, or some derivative of it specific to
Internet Network Management number assignments. (The
latest arrangements can be obtained by contacting the
IANA.)
Requests for new values should be made to IANA via
email (iana@iana.org)."
REFERENCE
"1. Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
Signaling Functional Description, RFC 3471, section 8.
2. Generalized MPLS Signaling - RSVP-TE Extensions,
RFC 3473, section 7.
3. GMPLS - Communication of Alarm Information,
RFC 4783, section 3.2.1."
SYNTAX BITS {
reflect(0), -- Reflect bit (RFC 3471)
reserved1(1), -- reserved
reserved2(2), -- reserved
reserved3(3), -- reserved
reserved4(4), -- reserved
reserved5(5), -- reserved
reserved6(6), -- reserved
reserved7(7), -- reserved
reserved8(8), -- reserved
reserved9(9), -- reserved
reserved10(10), -- reserved
reserved11(11), -- reserved
reserved12(12), -- reserved
reserved13(13), -- reserved
reserved14(14), -- reserved
reserved15(15), -- reserved
reserved16(16), -- reserved
reserved17(17), -- reserved
reserved18(18), -- reserved
reserved19(19), -- reserved
reserved20(20), -- reserved
reserved21(21), -- reserved
reserved22(22), -- reserved
reserved23(23), -- reserved
reserved24(24), -- reserved
reserved25(25), -- reserved
reserved26(26), -- reserved
reserved27(27), -- Inhibit Alarm bit (RFC 4783)
reserved28(28), -- reserved
testing(29), -- Testing bit (RFC 3473)
administrativelyDown(30), -- Admin down (RFC 3473)
deleteInProgress(31) -- Delete bit (RFC 3473)
}
END
12. References
12.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2205] Braden, R., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S.
Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1
Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997.
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
October 1998.
[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, January 2001.
[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V., and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001. [RFC3411] Harrington, D., Presuhn, R., and B. Wijnen, "An Architecture for Describing Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) Management Frameworks", STD 62, RFC 3411, December 2002. [RFC3471] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471, January 2003. [RFC3473] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. [RFC3477] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "Signalling Unnumbered Links in Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)", RFC 3477, January 2003. [RFC3811] Nadeau, T. and J. Cucchiara, "Definitions of Textual Conventions (TCs) 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 Router (LSR) Management Information Base (MIB)", RFC 3813, June 2004. [RFC3945] Mannie, E., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October 2004. [RFC4001] Daniele, M., Haberman, B., Routhier, S., and J. Schoenwaelder, "Textual Conventions for Internet Network Addresses", RFC 4001, February 2005. [RFC4202] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005.
[RFC4328] Papadimitriou, D., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, January 2006. [RFC4783] Berger, L., "GMPLS - Communication of Alarm Information", RFC 4783, December 2006. [RFC4803] Nadeau, T., Ed. and A. Farrel, Ed., "Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Label Switching Router (LSR) Management Information Base", RFC 4803, February 2007.12.2. Informative References
[RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000. [RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart, "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet- Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, December 2002. [RFC3472] Ashwood-Smith, P. and L. Berger, "Generalized Multi- Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Constraint-based Routed Label Distribution Protocol (CR-LDP) Extensions", RFC 3472, January 2003.
Contact Information
Thomas D. Nadeau Cisco Systems, Inc. 1414 Massachusetts Ave. Boxborough, MA 01719 EMail: tnadeau@cisco.com Cheenu Srinivasan Bloomberg L.P. 731 Lexington Ave. New York, NY 10022 Phone: +1-212-617-3682 EMail: cheenu@bloomberg.net Adrian Farrel Old Dog Consulting Phone: +44-(0)-1978-860944 EMail: adrian@olddog.co.uk Tim Hall Data Connection Ltd. 100 Church Street Enfield, Middlesex EN2 6BQ, UK Phone: +44 20 8366 1177 EMail: tim.hall@dataconnection.com Ed Harrison Data Connection Ltd. 100 Church Street Enfield, Middlesex EN2 6BQ, UK Phone: +44 20 8366 1177 EMail: ed.harrison@dataconnection.com
Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Intellectual Property The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. Acknowledgement Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.