Definitions of Textual Conventions for Path Computation Element
draft-ietf-pce-tc-mib-03

Status of this Memo

By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as “work in progress.”

The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

This Internet-Draft will expire on January 2, 2009.

Abstract

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 to represent commonly used Path Computation Element (PCE) management information. The intent is that these TEXTUAL CONVENTIONS (TCs) will be imported and used in PCE related MIB modules to avoid duplicating conventions.

Table of Contents

1.  Introduction
2.  The Internet-Standard Management Framework
3.  Conventions
4.  Structure of the MIB Module
5.  PCE Textual Conventions MIB Definitions
6.  Security Considerations
7.  IANA Considerations
8.  References
    8.1.  Normative References
    8.2.  Informative References
§  Author's Address
§  Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements

1.  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 to represent commonly used Path Computation Element (PCE) management information. The intent is that these TEXTUAL CONVENTIONS (TCs) will be imported and used in PCE related MIB modules to avoid duplicating conventions.

For an introduction to the concepts of PCE, see [RFC4655] (Farrel, A., Vasseur, J., and J. Ash, “A Path Computation Element (PCE)-Based Architecture,” August 2006.).

2.  The Internet-Standard Management Framework

For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current Internet-Standard Management Framework, please refer to section 7 of RFC 3410 [RFC3410] (Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart, “Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet-Standard Management Framework,” December 2002.).

Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed the Management Information Base or MIB. MIB objects are generally accessed through the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP). Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms defined in the Structure of Management Information (SMI). This memo specifies a MIB module that is compliant to the SMIv2, which is described in STD 58, RFC 2578 [RFC2578] (McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J. Schoenwaelder, Ed., “Structure of Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2),” April 1999.), STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579] (McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J. Schoenwaelder, Ed., “Textual Conventions for SMIv2,” April 1999.) and STD 58, RFC 2580 [RFC2580] (McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., and J. Schoenwaelder, “Conformance Statements for SMIv2,” April 1999.).

3.  Conventions

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL", when they appear in this document, are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119 [RFC2119] (Bradner, S., “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels,” March 1997.).

4.  Structure of the MIB Module

This MIB module defines PCE common SMI items. It defines the nodes for the homing of the MIB modules and TC to be imported and used in PCE related MIB modules.

PCE management information is arranged into 3 modules:

• PCE-TC-STD-MIB (defined in this memo) defined the root for homing Standard PCE MIB modules;
• PCE-DISC-STD-MIB defines the management information for monitoring PCE entities discovery;
• PCE-PCEP-STD-MIB defines the information for managing PCE communication protocol;

5.  PCE Textual Conventions MIB Definitions

PCE-TC-STD-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN

IMPORTS

MODULE-IDENTITY,

experimental FROM SNMPv2-SMI

TEXTUAL-CONVENTION

FROM SNMPv2-TC;

pceTCDraftMIB MODULE-IDENTITY

LAST-UPDATED "200709250000Z" -- September 25, 2007

ORGANIZATION "Path Computation Element (PCE) Working Group"

CONTACT-INFO "

Stephan Emile

France Telecom

Email: emile.stephan@orange-ftgroup.com

Email comments directly to the PCE WG Mailing List at pce@ietf.org

WG-URL: http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/pce-charter.html"

DESCRIPTION

"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 to represent commonly used Path Computation Element (PCE) management information. The intent is that these TEXTUAL CONVENTIONS (TCs) will be imported and used in PCE related MIB modules to avoid duplicating conventions."

::= { pceStdMIB 1 }

pceStdMIB OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { experimental 9999 }

-- RFC Editor: Please see the IANA Considerations Section.

-- 'experimental 9999' is a temporary root for running smilint.

-- 'pceStdMIB' will be homed in 'mib-2'

-- Textual Conventions (sorted alphabetically).

PcePcepIdentifier ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION

DISPLAY-HINT "1d.1d.1d.1d:1d:1d"

STATUS current

DESCRIPTION

"The LDP identifier is a six octet quantity which is used to identify a PCE client."

SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..6))

PceRoutingDomainID ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION

STATUS current

DESCRIPTION

"A PCE-DOMAINS information element or a A PCE-DEST-DOMAINS information element carries the identifier of a routing domain (area, as) which type depends on both the routing protocol and on the version of Internet protocol in use in this routing domain.

This TC defines a common SMI type for the different kinds of routing domain identifiers.

A PceRoutingDomainID value is always interpreted within the context of an AddressFamilyNumbers value. Every usage of the PceRoutingDomainID textual convention is required to specify the AddressFamilyNumbers object which provides the context.

The value of an PceRoutingDomainID object must always be consistent with the value of the associated AddressFamilyNumbers object.

Following is the mapping between AddressFamilyNumbers type and PceRoutingDomainID size:

ipV4(1):

PceRoutingDomainID is an InetAddressIPv4 corresponding to the name of an OSPF area;

ipV6(2):

PceRoutingDomainID is an InetAddressIPv6 corresponding to the name of an OSPF area;

nsap(3):

PceRoutingDomainID type is OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..20)), corresponding to the name of an ISIS area (see RFC 1195);

asNumber(18)

PceRoutingDomainID type is OCTET STRING (SIZE (2)) corresponding to the name of an Autonomous System.

"

SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..20))

END

6.  Security Considerations

This module defines only textual conventions. As security considerations can only be written in MIB modules that define management objects this document has no impact on the security of the Internet.

7.  IANA Considerations

IANA is requested to make a MIB OID assignment for pceStdMIB under the mib-2 branch.

PCE related standards track MIB modules should be homed under the pceStdMIB subtree. This document also requests IANA to assign { pceStdMIB 1 } to the PCE-TC-STD-MIB specified in this document.

8.  References

8.1. Normative References

8.2. Informative References

Author's Address

Full Copyright Statement

Copyright © 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.