lmpTeCounterDiscontinuityTime,
lmpDataLinkTestReceived,
lmpDataLinkTestSent,
lmpDataLinkActiveTestSuccess,
lmpDataLinkActiveTestFailure,
lmpDataLinkPassiveTestSuccess,
lmpDataLinkPassiveTestFailure,
lmpDataLinkDiscontinuityTime
}
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Collection of objects used to provide performance
information about LMP interfaces and data-bearing links."
::= { lmpGroups 7 }
lmpTeLinkGroup OBJECT-GROUP
OBJECTS { lmpTeLinkNbrRemoteNodeId,
lmpTeLinkVerification,
lmpTeLinkFaultManagement,
lmpTeLinkDwdm,
lmpTeLinkOperStatus,
lmpTeLinkRowStatus,
lmpTeLinkStorageType,
lmpTeLinkNotificationsEnabled
}
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Objects that can be used to configure TE links."
::= { lmpGroups 8 }
lmpDataLinkGroup OBJECT-GROUP
OBJECTS { lmpDataLinkType,
lmpDataLinkAddressType,
lmpDataLinkIpAddr,
lmpDataLinkRemoteIpAddress,
lmpDataLinkRemoteIfId,
lmpDataLinkEncodingType,
lmpDataLinkActiveOperStatus,
lmpDataLinkPassiveOperStatus,
lmpDataLinkRowStatus,
lmpDataLinkStorageType
}
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Collection of objects that represent data-bearing link
configuration."
::= { lmpGroups 9 }
lmpNotificationGroup NOTIFICATION-GROUP
NOTIFICATIONS { lmpTeLinkPropertyMismatch,
lmpDataLinkPropertyMismatch,
lmpUnprotected,
lmpControlChannelUp,
lmpControlChannelDown,
lmpTeLinkDegraded,
lmpTeLinkNotDegraded,
lmpDataLinkVerificationFailure }
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Set of notifications defined in this module."
::= { lmpGroups 10 }
-- End of LMP-MIB
END
10. Security Considerations
There are a number of management objects defined in this MIB module
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:
- Unauthorized changes to the lmpNbrTable, lmpControlChannelTable,
lmpTeLinkTable, and lmpDataLinkTable may disrupt allocation of
resources in the network.
Some of the readable objects in this MIB module (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:
- The lmpNbrTable exposes network provider’s node IP addresses.
- lmpControlChannelTable exposes network provider’s control
network.
- lmpDataLinkTable exposes network provider’s data network.
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 this MIB module.
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.
11. Contributors
Sudheer Dharanikota
EMail: sudheer@ieee.org
12. Acknowledgements
The general structure of this document has been modeled around the
MPLS Label Switching Router (LSR) MIB [RFC3813].
The authors wish to thank Dmitry Ryumkin, Baktha Muralidharan and
George Wang.
13. IANA Considerations
Each of the following "IANA Considerations" subsections requested
IANA for new assignments. New assignments can only be made via a
Standards Action as specified in [RFC2434].
13.1. IANA Considerations for lmp ifType
The IANA has assigned 227 ifType for LMP interfaces.
13.2. IANA Considerations for LMP-MIB
The IANA has assigned { transmission 227 } to the LMP-MIB module
specified in this document.
14. References
14.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 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.
[RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group
MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000.
[RFC2914] Floyd, S., "Congestion Control Principles", BCP 41, RFC
2914, September 2000.
[RFC3471] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471,
January 2003.
[RFC4001] Daniele, M., Haberman, B., Routhier, S., and J.
Schoenwaelder, "Textual Conventions for Internet
Network Addresses", RFC 4001, February 2005.
[RFC4204] Lang, J., "Link Management Protocol (LMP)", RFC 4204,
October 2005.
[RFC4207] Lang, J. and D. Papadimitriou, "Synchronous Optical
Network (SONET)/Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH)
Encoding for Link Management Protocol (LMP) Test
Messages", RFC 4207, October 2005.
[RFC4209] Fredette, A., Ed. and J. Lang, Ed., "Link Management
Protocol (LMP) for Dense Wavelength Division
Multiplexing (DWDM) Optical Line Systems", RFC 4209,
October 2005.
[RFC4220] Dubuc, M., Nadeau, T., and J. Lang, "Traffic
Engineering Link Management Information Base", RFC
4220, November 2005.
14.2. Informative References
[RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart,
"Introduction and Applicability Statements for
Internet-Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410,
December 2002.
[RFC3813] Srinivasan, C., Viswanathan, A., and T. Nadeau,
"Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic
Engineering (TE) Management Information Base (MIB)",
RFC 3812, June 2004.
Authors’ Addresses
Martin Dubuc
EMail: dubuc.consulting@sympatico.ca
Thomas D. Nadeau
Cisco Systems, Inc.
1414 Massachusetts Ave.
Boxborough, MA 01719
EMail: tnadeau@cisco.com
Jonathan P. Lang
Sonos, Inc.
223 E. De La Guerra St.
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
EMail: jplang@ieee.org
Evan McGinnis
Hammerhead Systems
640 Clyde Court
Mountain View, CA 94043
EMail: emcginnis@hammerheadsystems.com
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
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 provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).