Internet DRAFT - draft-rfced-info-perkins-status
draft-rfced-info-perkins-status
INTERNET-DRAFT Expires December 1997 INTERNET-DRAFT
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
A Clarification of the
STATUS Clause
in SNMP MIB Modules
<draft-rfced-info-perkins-status-02.txt>
June 7, 1997
David T. Perkins
dperkins@snmpinfo.com
1. Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet Draft. 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. Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by
other documents at any time. It is not appropriate to use Internet
Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as a
"working draft" or "work in progress."
To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the
"1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the internet-drafts Shadow
Directories on:
ftp.is.co.za (Africa)
nic.nordu.net (Europe)
ds.internic.net (US East Coast)
ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast)
munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim)
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 1]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
2. Introduction
This memo is informational. It specifies a clarification of the meaning
and use of the STATUS clause in Simple Network Management Protocol
(SNMP) Management Information Base (MIB) modules, which are defined by
the Structure of Management Information (SMI). There are two versions
of the SMI. The first, called SMIv1, is defined by RFCs 1155[1],
1212[2], and 1215[3]. The second, called SMIv2, is defined by RFCs
1902[4], 1903[5], and 1904[6]. Many of the MIB module constructs
defined by the SMIs such as OBJECT-IDENTITY, OBJECT-TYPE, and
NOTIFICATION-TYPE contain the STATUS clause. However, the SMIs do not
provide a complete definition of the STATUS clause, nor do they provide
guidance to MIB designers and users on the interpretation and action
required dependent upon the value or change of value for a STATUS
clause. Users include agent and application developers, and operators
of SNMP-managed networks.
This memo specifies a clarification for both version 1 and version 2 of
the SNMP SMI, which is a standard for the Internet community.
3. Background
The STATUS clause was first defined in "Structure and Identification of
Management Information for TCP/IP-based Internets," RFC 1065[7]. This
document lists the possible status values of object type definitions as
"mandatory," "optional," and "obsolete," but does not contain an
interpretation of these values. The document does provide the
definition of the prime directive of MIB design (in section 5), which
is:
New versions of MIB modules may:
(1) change the status of object types to obsolete (if necessary),
but may not delete their definitions;
(2) define new columnar object types for an existing table; or
(3) define entirely new object types.
New versions may not:
(1) change the semantics of any previously defined object type.
The original SMI definition was replaced by "Structure and
Identification of Management Information for TCP/IP-based Internets,"
RFC 1155[1]. However, no changes were made to the definition of the
STATUS clause or the prime directive for MIB design.
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 2]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
The document, "Concise MIB Definitions," RFC 1212[2], was written after
RFC 1155 to allow MIB designers to write MIB modules in a concise
format. The format combined the two formats specified in RFC 1155 for
writing definitions of managed objects. Also, RFC 1212 extended the
STATUS clause with the addition of the value "deprecated," and kept the
existing values of "mandatory," "optional," and "obsolete." Note that
RFC 1212 did not define the meaning of the new value "deprecated." The
only definition of the STATUS clause found in RFC 1212 is:
4.1.3. Mapping of the STATUS clause
The STATUS clause, which must be present, defines the
implementation support required for that object type.
Surprisingly, a definition of the value "deprecated" is specified in
"Management Information Base for Network Management of TCP/IP-based
internets: MIB-II," RFC 1213[8], which uses the concise format for
defining the IETF core objects. It is surprising, since the documents
that describe the language used to write MIB modules do not define use
of the STATUS clause, and the document that contains an example of a MIB
module, defines use of the STATUS clause.
The text from RFC 1213 describing the value of "deprecated" is:
3.1. Deprecated Objects
In order to better prepare implementors for future changes in the
MIB, a new term "deprecated" may be used when describing an object.
A deprecated object in the MIB is one which must be supported, but
one which will most likely be removed from the next version of the
MIB (e.g., MIB-III).
MIB-II marks one object as being deprecated:
atTable
As a result of deprecating the atTable object, the entire Address
Translation group is deprecated.
Note that no functionality is lost with the deprecation of these
objects: new objects providing equivalent or superior functionality
are defined in MIB-II.
RFC 1213 contains additional text to define the concept of conformance,
which is not previously defined in SMIv1. The text from RFC 1213,
section 5 is:
MIB-II, like its predecessor, the Internet-standard MIB, contains
only essential elements. There is no need to allow individual
objects to be optional. Rather, the objects are arranged into the
following groups:
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 3]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
- System
- Interfaces
- Address Translation (deprecated)
- IP
- ICMP
- TCP
- UDP
- EGP
- Transmission
- SNMP
These groups are the basic unit of conformance. This method is as
follows: if the semantics of a group is applicable to an
implementation, then it must implement all objects in that group.
For example, an implementation must implement the EGP group if and
only if it implements the EGP.
There are two reasons for defining these groups: to provide a means
of assigning object identifiers; and, to provide a method for
implementations of managed agents to know which objects they must
implement.
What may not be obvious from this history is that the STATUS clause is
used for two different purposes in SMIv1 format MIB modules. The first
use is to specify the status of a definition, that is, specify whether a
definition is valid or invalid. This is needed, since the prime
directive for MIB design does not allow a definition to be semantically
changed or "removed." A definition may only be "retired" and, if a new
definition is created, the new one must use a new identity. The second
use of the STATUS clause is to specify conformance requirements. To
eliminate the confusion caused by the two uses of one clause, the second
version of the SMI for SNMP changed the STATUS clause so that it
specifies only the validity of a definition.
The document, "Structure of Management Information for version 2 of the
Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2)," RFC 1442[9], and its
replacement, RFC 1902[4], define values for the STATUS clause as
"current," "deprecated," and "obsolete." Other MIB module language
constructs were added to specify conformance requirements[6][11]. The
STATUS clause is used in all but one of the SMIv2 MIB module language
constructs, which are OBJECT-IDENTITY, OBJECT-TYPE, NOTIFICATION-TYPE,
TEXTUAL-CONVENTION, OBJECT-GROUP, NOTIFICATION-GROUP, MODULE-COMPLIANCE,
and AGENT-CAPABILITIES. The lone exception is MODULE-IDENTITY.
For all constructs (except AGENT-CAPABILITIES), the text describing the
STATUS clause is the following:
The STATUS clause, which must be present, indicates whether this
definition is current or historic.
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 4]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
The values "current", and "obsolete" are self-explanatory. The
"deprecated" value indicates that the definition is obsolete, but
that an implementor may wish to support it to foster
interoperability with older implementations.
The text for the STATUS clause for AGENT-CAPABILITIES is the following:
The STATUS clause, which must be present, indicates whether this
definition is current ("current") or historic ("obsolete").
In both cases, it is clear that the STATUS clause in SMIv2 is used only
to describe the status of the definition and not the implementation
requirements. However, the definition leaves much interpretation to MIB
designers and users. Unfortunately, the interpretations by different
MIB designers and between designers and users has been quite different.
The next section describes the meaning of each value of the STATUS
clause with a high degree of precision. It also presents a table of
actions for agent and management application developers for each value.
4. The STATUS Clause Defined
The STATUS clause is used to specify the validity of a definition. A
valid definition has the following properties:
1. It is well conceived. The definition is precise, unambiguous,
complete, and applicable across a wide scope.
2. It is relevant. It is useful and has been used (or soon will
be used) for implementation.
On the other hand, an invalid definition has the following properties:
1. It is flawed. This can be due to technical inaccuracies or to
an extremely limited scope of applicability.
2. It is no longer relevant. The definition was redundant with
another, never implemented, or its implementation provided
little or no benefit.
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 5]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
Invalid definitions can be further divided. The small, but important
class of definitions that are called "deprecated" have the following
properties:
1. The definition is limited in applicability. Another
definition may have been created with a wider scope of
applicability.
2. The definition has limited implementation, possibly due to
cost of implementation. Another definition may have been
created with a lower implementation cost to increase the
probability of implementation.
Thus, the values for the STATUS clause and their meanings are the
following:
current(SMIv2) - the definition is valid.
mandatory(SMIv1) - the definition is valid and implementation is
required for conformance.
Optional(SMIv1) - the definition is valid, however, implementation
is not required for conformance.
deprecated(SMIv1 & SMIv2) - the definition is valid in limited
circumstances (and in SMIv1, implementation is required for
conformance), but has been replaced by another. The new definition
typically encompasses a wider scope, or has been changed to ease
implementation.
obsolete(SMIv1 & SMIv2) - the definition is not valid. It was found
to be flawed; could not be implemented; was redundant or not
useful; or was no longer relevant. The definition may, but need
not be, replaced with another.
5. MIB Module Life Cycle
MIB modules are designed, reviewed, published, implemented, and
maintained. The prime directive for MIB design requires that once a
definition has been published, that its semantics cannot be changed and
that it cannot be "removed." For the IETF, published means posted as an
RFC. Posting a work-in-progress in the internet-drafts directory does
not qualify as being published. The IETF standards process requires
that standard-track documents be reviewed at each level before
advancement. At each review, definitions are checked to determine if
they have been implemented and are useful. If not, then a new and
better definition is created, or the definition is retired. The
following diagram shows the life cycle of definitions:
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 6]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
definition
created
|
V
----------------------
| STATUS is current |<----
---------------------- |no change
| |in status
definition |
is reviewed ^
| / \
| / \ definition is
---------> < result > ---> usable, but
\ / needs update
\ / |
V |---> STATUS changed to
| | "deprecated" on
| | existing definition
| | and DESCRIPTION
| | clause updated.
V |
definition: |---> new definition
1) could not be created (with STATUS
implemented; of "current").
2) is redundant;
3) is not useful; or
4) is not relevant.
|
|--- > STATUS changed to "obsolete"
| on existing definition and
| DESCRIPTION clause updated.
|
optionally
|
|--- > new definition created
(with STATUS of "current")
MIB designers try to accomplish conflicting goals in creating
definitions in a MIB module. The definitions must describe the current
implementation of a technology, but must also try to anticipate future
implementations and changes in the technology. If definitions map too
tightly to current implementations, then any additions or changes in the
implementation of the technology will most likely break the mapping,
resulting in the definitions becoming useless. However, if the
definitions are too abstract or too broad in scope, they may not be
understood or used correctly. Also, extensive definitions will be more
costly to implement and test.
Development and use of products containing implementations of
definitions from MIB modules happens over time. Usually, managed
systems containing agents that support the definitions are fielded three
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 7]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
to nine months (or more) before sophisticated management applications.
Management capabilities must be used to learn which parts are useful.
Experience has shown that MIB designers cannot always get all
definitions right at the time the MIB is first published. Also,
different sets of agent and management application developers use the
definitions in a MIB module at different points in the life cycle of a
MIB module. For example, "bleeding edge" developers may be the
designers of the original MIB module. Developers of mass market
products may not develop implementations until after the MIB module has
reached "Full Standard" status.
6. Actions for Users of Definitions of Objects
Below is a list of actions for agent and management developers based on
the current value of STATUS for an object defined with the OBJECT-TYPE
construct, and actions based on a change of a status value:
6.1. Object created or has a STATUS of mandatory or current
Agent developers should implement the object if the resource modeled by
the definition is present on the system.
Management application developers can use the object, if needed, by
their application.
6.2. Object created or has STATUS of optional
Note that this value, found only in SMIv1, is not allowed in standard-
track MIB modules.
Agent developers should treat the object as if the definition had a
STATUS of current. Whether the object is implemented depends on the
requirements.
Management application developers should not use the object, since it
probably is not well conceived and probably not widely implemented.
6.3.1. Object has STATUS of deprecated
Agent developers should treat the object as if the definition had a
STATUS of current. Whether the object is implemented depends on the
requirements for compatibility with existing management applications.
The replacement object should be implemented if the deprecated object is
implemented.
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 8]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
Management application developers should treat the object as if the
definition had a status of current. The object should not be used as
the primary access to the management information. Instead, the
replacement object should be used. However, if compatibility is
required with existing agents, then the application should first try to
access the replacement object, and only if it is not implemented, should
the application try to access the object whose definition has a STATUS
of deprecated.
6.3.2 Object has STATUS changed to deprecated
Agent developers should implement the replacement object for the next
released version of the agent. Whether the object whose STATUS is
deprecated is removed depends on the resources needed to support it and
the requirement for compatibility with existing management applications.
Management application developers should implement the replacement
object for the next released version of the application. The primary
access to the management information should be changed to use the
replacement object. However, if compatibility is required with existing
agents, then the application should first try to access the replacement
object, and only if it is not implemented should the application try to
access the object whose definition had its STATUS changed to deprecated.
6.4.1. Object has STATUS of obsolete
Agent developers should not implement the object. If a replacement
object has been defined, it should be implemented if applicable.
Management application developers should not use the object.
6.4.2. Object has STATUS changed to obsolete
Agent developers may remove the object. If a replacement object has
been defined, it should be implemented if applicable.
Management application developers should remove use of the object in
applications and review their application for proper design.
7. An Invalid Implementation Approach for Agent Developers
The developer of an agent implementation may not have access to the
value of a "mandatory" object. In this case, GET requests of the object
must return "noSuchName" errors for SNMPv1 and "noSuchObject" exception
values for SNMPv2. SET requests of the object must return "noSuchName"
errors in SNMPv1 and "noAccess" errors in SNMPv2. GETNEXT (and GETBULK
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 9]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
in SNMPv2) requests must simply return the next lexicographically
ordered object. Unimplemented objects in a mandatory group for a
compliance specification result in the agent being labeled as "non-
compliant" to that specification. However, such an agent is still
compliant to the SNMP protocol. On the other hand, an agent that
returns "benign" values for readable objects or does not change
writeable objects is also labeled as "non-compliant" to the conformance
specification and is also non-compliant to the SNMP protocol
specification. Note that there are a few objects, such as
ipRouteMetric3, whose definition includes special values to indicate
certain conditions. These special values are not "benign" values. That
is, the implementation of the object is only compliant when the values
of the object truthfully reflect those in the managed resource. The
special value of -1 for ipRouteMetric3 indicates that the routing metric
is not used by the routing protocol.
8. MIB Update Requirements
The MIB module life cycle diagram, shown in section 5, indicates what
must occur when a MIB module is updated. Note that the text in section
10 of RFC 1902 specifies rules for updating MIB modules. Several of
these rules are clarified below:
1. The MODULE-IDENTITY construct for the MIB module must be
updated to include information about the revision. This
minimally includes updating the date on the LAST-UPDATED
clause and adding a pair of REVISION and DESCRIPTION clauses.
The name of the MIB module is not changed when its contents
are changed.
2. For each item with a change in the value of the STATUS clause,
the text of the DESCRIPTION clause must be updated to reflect
the change. When the status is changed to "deprecated," then
the description must specify the replacement item and range of
applicability. When the status is changed to "obsolete," then
the description must indicate the reason and must specify the
replacement item if one has been created. Typically, the
original text of the description is eliminated so that there
is no mistake over the status of the item.
3. A change of status of an item will affect the status of items
that depend on it. These dependent items must be reviewed
updated. The dependent items include object and notification
groups, module compliances, object types, notification types
and textual conventions. For example, if the status of an
object type changes, then the status of each notification
type, object group, and module compliance that includes the
object type needs to be updated. Additionally, new instances
of these items most likely need to be created that include the
replacement object type. Consider when the status of a
textual convention is modified. Each object type and textual
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 10]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
convention referencing (and dependent on) that textual
convention must be reviewed. These dependent items must be
changed. The change may be to use a replacement or to use the
type from the original textual convention. For any change,
the result must not modify the semantics of a dependent item.
8.1. Example of DESCRIPTION Update
When the status of an item is changed, the SMI requires that the text of
the DESCRIPTION clause be updated. Below are a few examples:
-- The status of an object changed from "current" to "deprecated"
atNetAddress OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX NetworkAddress
ACCESS read-write
STATUS deprecated
DESCRIPTION
"The NetworkAddress (e.g., the IP address)
corresponding to the media-dependent `physical'
address.
**NOTE: this object is deprecated and replaced by
ipNetToMediaNetAddress from table ipNetToMediaTable
and by similar objects in protocol specific tables."
::= { atEntry 3 }
-- The status of an object changed from "current" to "obsolete"
ospfAuthType OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-create
STATUS obsolete
DESCRIPTION
"**NOTE: this object is obsolete. Authentication is done
on each interface. See table ospfIfTable and object
ospfIfAuthType."
REFERENCE
"OSPF Version 2, Appendix E Authentication"
DEFVAL { 0 } -- no authentication, by default
::= { ospfAreaEntry 2 }
8.2. Don't Remove Obsolete Items
The "obsolete" value is meant to document the existence of a retired
definition. However, it can be observed (and even in IETF standard-
track MIB modules) that these definitions have been removed in updated
versions of the containing document. This is bad, and also is counter
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 11]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
to the prime directive for MIB design. No definitions may ever be
removed from published MIB modules!
Of course, it is possible to create a new MIB module to contain obsolete
definitions. For example, RFC 1232 contains a MIB module for managing
DS1 interfaces. It was replaced by RFC 1406, which replaced all
definitions in RFC 1232. The items defined in RFC 1232 were not
included in RFC 1406 and marked as "obsolete." Thus, RFC 1406 is not in
compliance with the prime directive for MIB design. The action by the
WG was an exception case. There were approximately 50 objects in RFC
1232 that were made obsolete by the publishing of RFC 1406. Including
the definitions for them in the MIB module in RFC 1406 may have obscured
replacement definitions or have confused the document readers. These
problems should have been addressed by either ordering the definitions
in the MIB module so that the obsolete ones were placed after the
current ones, or preferably the obsolete definitions moved to another
MIB module (contained in RFC 1406). Either one of these approaches
would be compliant to the prime directive for MIB design.
8.3. Consistency Requirement
At any point in time, the set of published MIB modules must be
consistent and their union must contain every item that has ever been
defined.
9. Acknowledgments
Thanks go to Evan McGinnis for his review, and to David Waitzman for his
suggestions.
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 12]
Draft A Clarification of STATUS June 7, 1997
10. References
[1] K. McCloghrie, M. Rose, "Structure and Identification of Management
Information for TCP/IP-based Internets", RFC 1155, 05/10/1990.
[2] K. McCloghrie, M. Rose, "Concise MIB Definitions", RFC 1212,
03/26/1991.
[3] M. Rose, "A Convention for Defining Traps for use with the SNMP",
RFC 1215, 03/27/1991.
[4] J. Case, K. McCloghrie, M. Rose, S. Waldbusser, "Structure of
Management Information for Version 2 of the Simple Network
Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1902, 01/22/1996.
[5] J. Case, K. McCloghrie, M. Rose, S. Waldbusser, "Textual
Conventions for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol
(SNMPv2)", RFC 1903, 01/22/1996.
[6] J. Case, K. McCloghrie, M. Rose, S. Waldbusser, "Conformance
Statements for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol
(SNMPv2)", RFC 1904, 01/22/1996.
[7] K. McCloghrie, M. Rose, "Structure and identification of management
information for TCP/IP-based internets", RFC 1065, 08/01/1988
[8] K. McCloghrie, M. Rose, "Management Information Base for Network
Management of TCP/IP-based internets: MIB-II", RFC1213, 03/26/1991.
[9] J. Case, K. McCloghrie, M. Rose, S. Waldbusser, "Structure of
Management Information for version 2 of the Simple Network
Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1442, 05/03/1993.
[10] J. Case, K. McCloghrie, M. Rose, S. Waldbusser, "Textual
Conventions for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol
(SNMPv2)", RFC 1443, 05/03/1993.
[11] J. Case, K. McCloghrie, M. Rose, S. Waldbusser, "Conformance
Statements for version 2 of the Simple Network Management Protocol
(SNMPv2)", RFC 1444, 05/03/1993.
Expires 12/07/97 [Page 13]
