[Docs] [txt|pdf] [draft-ietf-rmon...] [Tracker] [Diff1] [Diff2]
PROPOSED STANDARD
Network Working Group B. Wijnen
Request for Comments: 3737 Lucent Technologies
Category: Standards Track A. Bierman
Cisco Systems, Inc.
April 2004
IANA Guidelines for the Registry of
Remote Monitoring (RMON) MIB modules
Status 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) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
This document defines the procedures for IANA to administer and
maintain the Object Identifier (OID) tree under the Remote Monitoring
(rmon) root. This memo also documents the currently assigned values.
1. Introduction
The RMONMIB Working Group so far has maintained its own registry for
OID assignments for new MIB modules under the root OID for rmon
[RFC2819]. This has worked reasonably well, although errors had to
be corrected at a late stage one or two times, and a few now defunct
assignments have been made as well.
It is also a somewhat non-standard way of doing things, because
normally a new standards track MIB module will get a MIB root
assigned at the time that the module is being published as part of an
RFC.
This document lists the currently assigned rmon OIDs. It also
describes the procedures and rules for new assignments and asks IANA
to take over the responsibility for existing and future assignments.
The current assignments are not all too logical. Initially normal
MIB OIDs were assigned under rmon, but at a later time the WG used
the rmon root OID to create new MIB modules underneath it. Some
Wijnen & Bierman Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 3737 IANA Guidelines for the RMON Registry April 2004
people will claim 'an OID is just an OID', and while this is true, it
does not make things easier if the organisation of OIDs is not
logical. However, we cannot change what has been assigned in the
past. From now on, only MODULE-IDENTITY macro (MIB root) assignments
will be made (by IANA) under the 'rmon' node. Within a MIB module,
the working group authors/editors can then assign their own OIDs
according to normal procedures.
2. Currently assigned OIDs under the rmon root
At the time of this writing, the following OIDs have been assigned
and IANA has picked up this information in their public registry of
assigned values. They are listed as part of the already existing
smi-numbers registry at:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers
...mib-2.rmon (1.3.6.1.2.1.16)
The assignments under ...mib-2.rmon were maintained by the RMONMIB
Working Group until publication of RFC 3737. Some (early)
assignments may not look all too logical. That is true, but that is
history and cannot be changed. From now on, only MODULE-IDENTITY
macro (MIB root) assignments will be made (by IANA) under the 'rmon'
node.
Wijnen & Bierman Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 3737 IANA Guidelines for the RMON Registry April 2004
Key: nnn == { rmon nnn }
nnn descriptor OID Type Document
0 rmonEventsV2 Notifications root [RFC2819]
1 statistics OID [RFC2819]
2 history OID [RFC2819]
3 alarm OID [RFC2819]
4 hosts OID [RFC2819]
5 hostTopN OID [RFC2819]
6 matrix OID [RFC2819]
7 filter OID [RFC2819]
8 capture OID [RFC2819]
9 event OID [RFC2819]
10 tokenRing OID [RFC1513]
11 protocolDir OID [RFC2021]
12 protocolDist OID [RFC2021]
13 addressMap OID [RFC2021]
14 nlHost OID [RFC2021]
15 nlMatrix OID [RFC2021]
16 alHost OID [RFC2021]
17 alMatrix OID [RFC2021]
18 usrHistory OID [RFC2021]
19 probeConfig OID [RFC2021]
20 rmonConformance OID [RFC2021]
21 mediaIndependentStats OID [RFC3273]
22 switchRMON M-I [RFC2613]
23 apm M-I [RFC3729]
24 available
25 pmCapsMIB M-I (defunct)
26 dsmonMIB M-I [RFC3287]
27 interfaceTopNMIB M-I [RFC3144]
28 reserved for sspmMIB M-I [..rmonmib-sspm-mib-nn.txt]
29 hcAlarmMIB M-I [RFC3434]
30 reserved for tpmMIB M-I [..rmonmib-tpm-mib-nn.txt]
31 reserved for raqmon M-I [..rmonmib-raqmon-mib-nn.txt]
32 reserved for raqmonDs M-I [..rmonmib-raqmon-pdu-nn.txt]
Wijnen & Bierman Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 3737 IANA Guidelines for the RMON Registry April 2004
Key: xxx == { rmon.rmonConformance xxx }
...mib-2.rmon.conformance (1.3.6.1.2.1.16.20)
xxx descriptor OID Type Document
1 rmon2MIBCompliances OID [RFC2021]
2 rmon2MIBGroups OID [RFC2021]
3 smonMIBCompliances OID [RFC2613]
4 smonMIBGroups OID [RFC2613]
5 hcRMON M-I [RFC3273]
6 hcRmonMIBCompliances OID [RFC3273]
7 hcRmonMIBGroups OID [RFC3273]
8 rmonMibModule M-I [RFC2819]
9 rmonCompliances OID [RFC2819]
10 rmonGroups OID [RFC2819]
3. How to request a new assignment for a MIB module
When anyone is writing a internet-draft for which a new assignment is
needed/wanted under the rmon OID, then the proper way to do so is as
follows:
EXAMPLE-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN
IMPORTS
rmon FROM RMON-MIB
.. other imports ..
exampleMIB MODULE-IDENTITY
... other normal MODULE-IDENTITY stuff ...
::= { rmon nnn } -- IANA: please assign nnn
-- RFC-Editor: replace nnn with IANA-assigned
-- number and remove this note
IANA will assign the number as part of the RFC publication process.
4. Security Considerations
This memo describes procedures for IANA assignment of OBJECT
IDENTIFIER values, and has no impact on the security of the Internet.
Wijnen & Bierman Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 3737 IANA Guidelines for the RMON Registry April 2004
5. IANA Considerations
IANA has picked up the initial set of assignments and integrated them
into the existing registry for smi-numbers at:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/smi-numbers
The list is presented in Section 2.
IANA is requested to maintain this registry for future assignments.
New assignments can only be made via Standards Action as described in
[RFC2434].
IANA will assign the number as part of the RFC publication process.
6. Acknowledgments
This document was produced as a result of discussion between the
Operations and Management AD responsible for Network Management and
the WG chair for the RMONMIB Working Group. Thanks to Andy Bierman
for keeping and administering the registry up to this point in time.
The document has been reviewed by the RMONMIB Working Group.
7. Normative References
[RFC1513] Waldbusser, S., "Token Ring Extensions to the Remote
Network Monitoring MIB", RFC 1513, September 1993.
[RFC2021] Waldbusser, S., "Remote Network Monitoring Management
Information Base Version 2 using SMIv2", RFC 2021, January
1997.
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
October 1998.
[RFC2613] Waterman, R., Lahaye, B., Romascanu, D. and S. Waldbusser,
"Remote Network Monitoring MIB Extensions for Switched
Networks Version 1.0", RFC 2613, June 1999.
[RFC2819] Waldbusser, S., "Remote Network Monitoring Management
Information Base", STD 59, RFC 2819, May 2000.
[RFC3144] Romascanu, D., "Remote Monitoring MIB Extensions for
Interface Parameters Monitoring", RFC 3144, August 2001.
Wijnen & Bierman Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 3737 IANA Guidelines for the RMON Registry April 2004
[RFC3273] Waldbusser, S., "Remote Network Monitoring Management
Information Base for High Capacity Networks", RFC 3273,
July 2002.
[RFC3287] Bierman, A., "Remote Monitoring MIB Extensions for
Differentiated Services", RFC 3287, July 2002.
[RFC3434] Bierman, A. and K. McCloghrie, "Remote Monitoring MIB
Extensions for High Capacity Alarms", RFC 3434, December
2002.
[RFC3729] Waldbusser, S., "Application Performance Measurement
MIB", RFC 3729, March 2004.
8. Authors' Addresses
Bert Wijnen
Lucent Technologies
Schagen 33
3461 GL Linschoten
Netherlands
Phone: +31-348-407-775
EMail: bwijnen@lucent.com
Andy Bierman
Cisco Systems, Inc.
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA
USA
Phone: +1-408-527-3711
EMail: abierman@cisco.com
Wijnen & Bierman Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 3737 IANA Guidelines for the RMON Registry April 2004
9. Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). 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 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.
Wijnen & Bierman Standards Track [Page 7]
Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129b, available from
https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/
