Network Working Group T. Nadeau Internet Draft BT Intended status: Standards Track Z. Ali Expires: March 6, 2010 Cisco Systems, Inc. N. Akiya Cisco Systems G.K. September 7, 2010 Definitions of Textual Conventions (TCs) for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Management draft-ietf-bfd-tc-mib-00 Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 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. 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/1id-abstracts.html The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html Copyright and License Notice Nadeau, et al. Expires January 8, 2011 [Page 1] Internet-Draft BFD MIB July 2010 Copyright (c) 2010 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 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Abstract This draft defines a Management Information Base (MIB) module which contains Textual Conventions to represent commonly used Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) management information. The intent is that these TEXTUAL CONVENTIONS (TCs) will be imported and used in BFD related MIB modules that would otherwise define their own representations. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. BFD Textual Conventions MIB Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9. Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1. Introduction This document defines a MIB module which contains Textual Conventions for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) protocols. These Textual Conventions should be imported by MIB modules which manage BFD protocols. 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. Expires January 8, 2011 [Page 2] Internet-Draft BFD MIB July 2010 For an introduction to the concepts of BFD, see [BFD], [BFD-1HOP] and [BFD-MH]. 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 [RFC3410]. 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, [RFC2578], STD 58, [RFC2579] and STD 58, [RFC2580]. 3. BFD Textual Conventions MIB Definitions BFD-TC-STD-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN IMPORTS MODULE-IDENTITY, mib-2, Unsigned32 FROM SNMPv2-SMI -- [RFC2578] TEXTUAL-CONVENTION FROM SNMPv2-TC; -- [RFC2579] bfdTCStdMib MODULE-IDENTITY LAST-UPDATED "201009071200Z" -- 7 September 2010 12:00:00 EST ORGANIZATION "IETF Bidirectional Forwarding Detection Working Group" CONTACT-INFO "Thomas D. Nadeau BT Email: tnadeau@lucidvision.com Zafar Ali Cisco Systems, Inc. Email: zali@cisco.com Nobo Akiya Cisco Systems, G.K. Email: nobo@cisco.com" DESCRIPTION "This MIB module defines TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONs for concepts used in Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Nadeau, et al. Expires January 8, 2011 [Page 3] Internet-Draft BFD MIB July 2010 protocols." REVISION "201009071200Z" -- 7 September 2010 12:00:00 EST DESCRIPTION "Initial version. Published as RFC xxxx." -- RFC Ed.: RFC-editor pls fill in xxxx ::= { mib-2 XXX } -- RFC Ed.: assigned by IANA, see section 5 for details BfdSessIndexTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS current DESCRIPTION "An index used to uniquely identify BFD sessions." SYNTAX Unsigned32 (1..4294967295) BfdIntervalTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The BFD interval in microseconds." SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..4294967295) BfdMultiplierTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS current DESCRIPTION "The BFD failure detection multiplier." SYNTAX Unsigned32 (1..255) BfdDiagTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS current DESCRIPTION "A common BFD diagnostic code." SYNTAX INTEGER { noDiagnostic(0), controlDetectionTimeExpired(1), echoFunctionFailed(2), neighborSignaledSessionDown(3), forwardingPlaneReset(4), pathDown(5), concatenatedPathDown(6), administrativelyDown(7), reverseConcatenatedPathDown(8) } BfdSessTypeTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS current DESCRIPTION "BFD session type" Nadeau, et al. Expires January 8, 2011 [Page 4] Internet-Draft BFD MIB July 2010 REFERENCE "RFC5880, RFC5881, RFC5883" SYNTAX INTEGER { singleHop(1), multiHopTotallyArbitraryPaths(2), multiHopOutOfBandSignaling(3), multiHopUnidirectionalLinks(4), multiPointHead(5), multiPointTail(6) } BfdSessOperModeTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS current DESCRIPTION "BFD session operating mode" REFERENCE "RFC5880, Section 3.2" SYNTAX INTEGER { asyncModeWEchoFunction(1), asynchModeWOEchoFunction(2), demandModeWEchoFunction(3), demandModeWOEchoFunction(4) } BfdCtrlDestPortNumberTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS current DESCRIPTION "UDP destination port number of BFD control packets. 3784 represents single hop BFD session. 4784 represents multi hop BFD session. However, syntax is left open to wider range of values purposely for two reasons: 1. implementation uses non-compliant port number for valid proprietary reason. 2. potential future extension drafts." REFERENCE "Port 3784 (RFC5881) and Port 4784 (RFC5883)" SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..65535) BfdCtrlSourcePortNumberTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "d" STATUS current DESCRIPTION "UDP source port number of BFD control packets. However, syntax is left open to wider range of values purposely for two reasons: 1. implementation uses non-compliant port number for valid proprietary reason. Nadeau, et al. Expires January 8, 2011 [Page 5] Internet-Draft BFD MIB July 2010 2. potential future extension drafts." REFERENCE "Port 49152..65535 (RFC5881)" SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..65535) BfdSessStateTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS current DESCRIPTION "BFD session state. State failing(5) is only applicable if corresponding session is running in BFD version 0." REFERENCE "draft-katz-ward-bfd-02.txt, RFC5880" SYNTAX INTEGER { adminDown(1), down(2), init(3), up(4), failing(5) } BfdSessAuthenticationTypeTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION STATUS current DESCRIPTION "BFD authentication type" REFERENCE "RFC5880, Sections 4.2 - 4.4" SYNTAX INTEGER { noAuthentication(-1), reserved(0), simplePassword(1), keyedMD5(2), meticulousKeyedMD5(3), keyedSHA1(4), meticulousKeyedSHA1(5) } BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION DISPLAY-HINT "1x " STATUS current DESCRIPTION "BFD authentication key type. A BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC is always interpreted within the context of an BfdSessAuthenticationTypeTC value. Every usage of the BfdSessionAuthenticationTypeTC textual convention is required to specify the the BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC object that provides the context. It is suggested that the BfdSessionAuthentcationTypeTC object be logically registered Nadeau, et al. Expires January 8, 2011 [Page 6] Internet-Draft BFD MIB July 2010 before the object(s) that use the BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC textual convention, if they appear in the same logical row. The value of a BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC must always be consistent with the value of the associated BfdSessionAuthencationTypeTC object. Attempts to set a BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC object to a value inconsistent with the associated BfdSessionAuthenticationTypeTC must fail with an inconsistentValue error. The following size constraints for a BfdSessionAuthenticationKeyTC object are defined for the associated BfdSessionAuthenticationTypeTC values show below: noAuthentication(-1): SIZE(0) reserved(0): SIZE(0) simplePassword(1): SIZE(1..16) keyedMD5(2): SIZE(16) meticulousKeyedMD5(3): SIZE(16) keyedSHA1(4): SIZE(20) meticulousKeyedSHA1(5): SIZE(20) When this textual convention is used as the syntax of an index object, there may be issues with the limit of 128 sub-identifiers specified in SMIv2, STD 58. In this case, the object definition MUST include a 'SIZE' clause to limit the number of potential instance sub-identifiers; otherwise the applicable constraints MUST be stated in the appropriate conceptual row DESCRIPTION clauses, or in the surrounding documentation if there is no single DESCRIPTION clause that is appropriate." REFERENCE "RFC5880, Sections 4.2 - 4.4" SYNTAX OCTET STRING(SIZE(0..252)) END 4. Security Considerations This module does not define any management objects. Instead, it defines a set of textual conventions which may be used by other BFD 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. Nadeau, et al. Expires January 8, 2011 [Page 7] Internet-Draft BFD MIB July 2010 5. IANA Considerations The MIB module in this document uses the following IANA-assigned OBJECT IDENTIFIER values recorded in the SMI Numbers registry: Descriptor OBJECT IDENTIFIER value ---------- ----------------------- bfdTCStdMib { mib-2 XXX } [Editor's Note (to be removed prior to publication): the IANA is requested to assign a value for "XXX" under the 'mib-2' subtree and to record the assignment in the SMI Numbers registry. When the assignment has been made, the RFC Editor is asked to replace "XXX" (here and in the MIB module) with the assigned value and to remove this note.] 6. References 6.1. Normative References [BFD] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)", RFC 5880, June 2010. [BFD-1HOP] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop)", RFC 5881, June 2010. [BFD-MH] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for Multihop Paths", RFC 5883, June 2010. [RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J. Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Structure of Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April 1999. [RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J. Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Textual Conventions for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999. 6.2. Informative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart, "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet- Nadeau, et al. Expires January 8, 2011 [Page 8] Internet-Draft BFD MIB July 2010 Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, December 2002. [RFC3413] Levi, D., Meyer, P., and B. Stewart, "Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) Applications", STD 62, RFC 3413, December 2002. Appendix A. Acknowledgments We would like to thank David Ward and Jeffrey Haas for their comments and suggestions. Authors' Addresses Thomas D. Nadeau BT BT Centre 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ United Kingdom Email: tnadeau@lucidvision.com Zafar Ali Cisco Systems, Inc. 2000 Innovation Drive Kanata, Ontario K2K 3E8 Canada Email: zali@cisco.com Nobo Akiya Cisco Systems G.K. Shinjuku Mitsui Building 2-1-1 Nishi-Shinjuku, Shinjuku-Ku Tokyo 163-0409 Japan Email: nobo@cisco.com Nadeau, et al. Expires January 8, 2011 [Page 9]