One document matched: draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01.txt
Differences from draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-00.txt
Internet Engineering Task Force GMG. G.Galimberti, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco
Intended status: Standards Track RK. R.Kunze, Ed.
Expires: May 3, 2012 Deutsche Telekom
Kam. Kam Lam, Ed.
Alcatel-Lucent
October 31, 2011
A SNMP MIB to manage black-link optical interface parameters of DWDM
applications
draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01
Abstract
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
used by Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) in TCP/IP- based
internets. In particular, it defines objects for managing Optical
parameters associated with Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM)
systems or characterized by the Optical Transport Network (OTN) in
accordance with the Black-Link approach defined in ITU-T
Recommendation G.698.2. [ITU.G698.2]
The MIB module defined in this memo can be used for Optical
Parameters monitoring and/or configuration of the endpoints of Black
Links.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 3, 2012.
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. Optical Parameters Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1.2. Parameters at Ss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.3. Optical path from point Ss to Rs . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.4. Interface at point Rs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.1.5. Alarms and Threshold definition . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.1.6. Performance Monitoring (PM) description . . . . . . . 12
4.1.7. Generic Parameter description . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.2. Use of ifTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.2.1. Use of ifTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.2.2. Use of ifTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.2.3. Use of ifTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5. Structure of the MIB Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. Object Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7. Relationship to Other MIB Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7.1. Relationship to the [TEMPLATE TODO] MIB . . . . . . . . . 15
7.2. MIB modules required for IMPORTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
11. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Appendix B. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
1. Introduction
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
used by Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) in TCP/IP- based
internets. In particular, it defines objects for managing Optical
parameters associated with Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM)
systems or characterized by the Optical Transport Network (OTN) in
accordance with the Black-Link approach defined in G.698.2
[ITU.G698.2]
Black Link approach allows supporting an optical transmitter/receiver
pair of one vendor to inject a DWDM channel and run it over an
optical network composed of amplifiers, filters, add-drop
multiplexers from a different vendor. From architectural point of
view, the "Black Link" is a set of pre-configured/qualified network
connections between the G.698.2 reference points S and R. The black
links will be managed at the edges (i.e. the transmitters and
receivers attached to the S and R reference points respectively) for
the relevant parameters specified in G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2], G.798
[ITU.G798], G.874 [ITU.G874], and the performance parameters
specified G.7710/Y.1701 [ITU-T G.7710] and and G.874.1 [ITU.G874.1].
The G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] provides optical parameter values for
physical layer interfaces of Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing
(DWDM) systems primarily intended for metro applications which
include optical amplifiers. Applications are defined in G.698.2
[ITU.G698.2] using optical interface parameters at the single-channel
connection points between optical transmitters and the optical
multiplexer, as well as between optical receivers and the optical
demultiplexer in the DWDM system. This Recommendation uses a
methodology which does not specify the details of the optical link,
e.g. the maximum fibre length, explicitly. The Recommendation
currently includes unidirectional DWDM applications at 2.5 and 10
Gbit/s (with 100 GHz and 50 GHz channel frequency spacing). Work is
still underway for 40 and 100 Gbit/s interfaces. There is
possibility for extensions to a lower channel frequency spacing.
This draft refers and supports also the
draft-kunze-g698-mgnt-ctrl-framework.
The building of a SNMP MIB describing the optical parameters defined
in G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] G.798 [ITU.G798], G.874 [ITU.G874],
parameters specified G.7710/Y.1701 [ITU-T G.7710] allows the
different vendors and operator to retrieve, provision and exchange
information related to Optical blak links in a standardized way.
This facilitates interworking in case of using optical interfaces
from different vendors at the end of the link. The MIB, reporting
the Optical parameters and their values, characterizes the features
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
and the performances of the optical components and allow a reliable
black link design in case of multivendor optical networks.
Although RFC 3591 [RFC3591] describes and defines the SNMP MIB of a
number of key optical parameters, alarms and Performance Monitoring,
a more complete description of optical parameters and processes can
be found in the ITU-T Recommendations. Appendix A of this document
provides an overview about the extensive ITU-T documentation in this
area. The same considerations can be applied to the RFC 4054
[RFC4054]
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].
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], STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58, RFC 2580
[RFC2580].
3. Conventions
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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119] In
the description of OIDs the convention: Set (S) Get (G) and Trap (T)
conventions will describe the action allowed by the paramenter.
4. Overview
In this document, the term OTN (Optical Transport Network) system is
used to describe devices that are compliant with the requirements
specified in the ITU-T Recommendations G.872 [ITU.G872], G.709
[ITU.G709] , G.798 [ITU.G798], G.874 [ITU.G874], and G.874.1
[ITU.G874.1] while refers to G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] for the Black Link
and DWDM parameter description.
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
Figure 1 shows a set of reference points, for the linear "black-link"
approach, for single-channel connection (Ss and Rs) between
transmitters (Tx) and receivers (Rx). Here the DWDM network elements
include an OM and an OD (which are used as a pair with the opposing
element), one or more optical amplifiers and may also include one or
more OADMs.
+-------------------------------------------------+
Ss | DWDM Network Elements | Rs
+---+ | | | \ / | | | +---+
Tx L1----|->| \ +------+ +------+ / |--|--->Rx L1
+---+ | | | | | +------+ | | | | | +---+
+---+ | | | | | | | | | | | | +---+
Tx L2----|->| OM |-->|------|->| OADM |--|------|->| OD |--|--->Rx L2
+---+ | | | | | | | | | | | | +---+
+---+ | | | | | +------+ | | | | | +---+
Tx L3----|->| / | DWDM | | ^ | DWDM | \ |--|--->Rx L3
+---+ | | / | Link +----|--|----+ Link | \ | | +---+
+-----------+ | | +----------+
+--+ +--+
| |
v |
+-----+ +-----+
|RxLx | |TxLx |
+-----+ +-----+
Ss = reference point at the DWDM network element tributary output
Rs = reference point at the DWDM network element tributary input
Lx = Lambda x
OM = Optical Mux
OD = Optical Demux
OADM = Optical Add Drop Mux
from Fig. 5.1/G.698.2
Figure 1: Linear Black Link
G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] defines also Ring Black Link configurations
[Fig. 5.2/G.698.2] and Bidiractional Black Link configurations [Fig.
5.3/G.698.2]
4.1. Optical Parameters Description
The black links are managed at the edges, i.e. at the transmitters
(Tx) and receivers (Rx) attached to the S and R reference points
respectively. The parameters that could be managed at the black link
edges are specified in G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] for the optical
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
interface, in G.798 [ITU.G798] for the equipment aspect, and in
G.7710/Y.1701 [ITU.G7710] and G.874 [ITU.G874] for fault management
and performance monitoring.
The definitions of the optical parameters are provided below to
increase the readability of the document, where the definition is
ended by (G) the parameter can be retrieve with a GET, when (S) it
can be provisioned by a SET, (G,S) can be either GET and SET.
To support the management of these parameters, the SNMP MIB in RFC
3591 [RFC3591] is extended with a new MIB module defined in section
56 of this document. This new MIB module includes the definition of
XXX, which represents the parameters at Tx (S) and Rx (R).
Editor Note: Yet to be decided, XXX could be OChr configuration and
monitoring tables.
4.1.1. General
The following general parameters from G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] and
G.694.1 [ITU.G694.1] provide general information at the optical
interface reference points.
Minimum channel spacing:
This is the minimum nominal difference in frequency (in GHz)
between two adjacent channels (G).
Bit rate/line coding of optical tributary signals:
Optical tributary signal class NRZ 2.5G (from nominally 622 Mbit/s
to nominally 2.67 Gbit/s) or NRZ 10G nominally 2.4 Gbit/s to
nominally 10.71 Gbit/s. (nominally 2.4 Gbit/s to nominally 10.71
Gbit/s). 40Gbit/s and 100Gbit/s are under study (G, S).
FEC Coding:
This parameter indicate what Forward Error Correction (FEC) code
is used at Ss and Rs (G, S) (not mentioned in G.698). EDITOR
NOTE: Need to check whether this parameter is to be put in "vendor
specific" parameter or can be a standard paramenter as defined in
G.698.2. Is this the various adaptations (FEC encoding types)
specified in G.798 clauses 12.3.1.1 (with FEC), 12.3.1.2 (without
FEC), and 12.3.1.5 (vender-specific FEC) .
Maximum bit error ratio (BER):
This parameter indicate the maximum Bit error rate can be
supported by the application at the Receiver. In case of FEC
applications it is intended after the FEC correction (G) .
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
Fiber type:
Fiber type as per fibre types are chosen from those defined in
ITU-T Recs G.652, G.653, and G.655 (G,S) .
Wavelength Range (see G.694.1): [ITU.G694.1]
This parameter indicate minimum and maximum wavelength spectrum
(G) in a definite wavelength Band (L, C and S).
Wavelength Value (see G.694.1):
This parameter indicates the wavelength value that Ss and Rs will
be set to work (G, S).
Vendor Transceiver Class:
Other than specifying all the Transceiver parameter, it might be
convenient for the vendors to summarize a set of parameters in a
single proprietary parameter: the Class of transceiver. The
Transceiver classification will be based on the Vendor Name and
the main TX and RX parameters (i.e. Trunk Mode, Framing, Bit
rate, Trunk Type, Channel Band, Channel Grid, Modulation Format,
Channel Modulation Format, FEC Coding, Electrical Signal Framing
at Tx, Minimum maximum Chromatic Disperion (CD) at Rx, Maximum
Polarization Mode Dispersion (PMD) at Rx, Maximum differential
group delay at Rx, Loopbacks, TDC, Pre-FEC BER, Q-factor,
Q-margin,etc.). If this parameter is used, the MIB parameters
specifying the Transceiver characteristics may not be significant
and the vendor will be responsible to specify the Class contents
and values. The Vendor can publish the parameters of its Classes
or declare to be compatible with published Classes.(G) Optional
for compliance. (not mentioned in G.698)
single-channel application codes (see G.698.2):
This parameter indicates the transceiver application code at Ss
and Rs as defined in [ITU.G698.2] Chapter 5.3 - this parameter can
be called Optical Interface Identifier OII as per
[draft-martinelli-wson-interface-class] (G, S).
4.1.2. Parameters at Ss
The following parameters for the interface at point S are defined in
G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2].
Maximum and minimum mean channel output power:
The mean launched power at Ss is the average power (in dBm) of a
pseudo-random data sequence coupled into the DWDM link. It is
defined as the rhange (Max and Min ) of the parameter (G, S)
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
Minimum and maximum central frequency:
The central frequency is the nominal single-channel frequency (in
THz) on which the digital coded information of the particular
optical channel is modulated by use of the NRZ line code. The
central frequencies of all channels within an application lie on
the frequency grid for the minimum channel spacing of the
application given in ITU-T Rec. G.694.1. This parameter give the
Maximum and minimum frequency interval the channel must be
modulated (G)
Maximum spectral excursion:
This is the maximum acceptable difference between the nominal
central frequency (in GHz) of the channel and the minus 15 dB
points of the transmitter spectrum furthest from the nominal
central frequency measured at point Ss. (G)
Maximum transmitter (residual) dispersion OSNR penalty (B.3/G.959.1)
[ITU.G959.1]
Defines a reference receiver that this penalty is measured with.
Lowest OSNR at Ss with worst case (residual) dispersion minus the
Lowest OSNR at Ss with no dispersion. Lowest OSNR at Ss with no
dispersion (G)
Minimum side mode suppression ratio, Minimum channel extinction
ratio, Eye mask:
Although are defined in G.698.2 are not supported by this draft.
4.1.3. Optical path from point Ss to Rs
The following parameters for the optical path from point S and R are
defined in G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2].
Maximum and minimum (residual) chromatic dispersion:
These parameters define the maximum and minimum value of the
optical path "end to end chromatic dispersion" (in ps/nm) that the
system shall be able to tolerate. (G)
Minimum optical return loss at Ss:
These parameter defines minimum optical return loss (in dB) of the
cable plant at the source reference point (Ss), including any
connectors (G)
Maximum discrete reflectance between SS and RS:
Optical reflectance is defined to be the ratio of the reflected
optical power present at a point, to the optical power incident to
that point. Control of reflections is discussed extensively in
ITU-T Rec. G.957 (G)
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
Maximum differential group delay:
Differential group delay (DGD) is the time difference between the
fractions of a pulse that are transmitted in the two principal
states of polarization of an optical signal. For distances
greater than several kilometres, and assuming random (strong)
polarization mode coupling, DGD in a fibre can be statistically
modelled as having a Maxwellian distribution. (G)
Maximum polarisation dependent loss:
The polarisation dependent loss (PDL) is the difference (in dB)
between the maximum and minimum values of the channel insertion
loss (or gain) of the black-link from point SS to RS due to a
variation of the state of polarization (SOP) over all SOPs. (G)
Maximum inter-channel crosstalk:
Inter-channel crosstalk is defined as the ratio of total power in
all of the disturbing channels to that in the wanted channel,
where the wanted and disturbing channels are at different
wavelengths. The parameter specify the isolation of a link
conforming to the "black-link" approach such that under the worst-
case operating conditions the inter-channel crosstalk at any
reference point RS is less than the maximum inter-channel
crosstalk value (G)
Maximum interferometric crosstalk:
This parameter places a requirement on the isolation of a link
conforming to the "black-link" approach such that under the worst
case operating conditions the interferometric crosstalk at any
reference point RS is less than the maximum interferometric
crosstalk value. (G)
Maximum optical path OSNR penalty:
The optical path OSNR penalty is defined as the difference between
the Lowest OSNR at Rs and Lowest OSNR at Ss that meets the BER
requirement (G)
Maximum ripple:
Although is defined in G.698.2, this parameter is not supported by
this draft.
4.1.4. Interface at point Rs
The following parameters for the interface at point R are defined in
G.698.2.
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
Maximum and minimum mean input power:
The maximum and minimum values of the average received power (in
dBm) at point Rs. (G)
Minimum optical signal-to-noise ratio (OSNR):
The minimum optical signal-to-noise ratio (OSNR) is the minimum
value of the ratio of the signal power in the wanted channel to
the highest noise power density in the range of the central
frequency plus and minus the maximum spectral excursion (G)
Receiver OSNR tolerance:
The receiver OSNR tolerance is defined as the minimum value of
OSNR at point Rs that can be tolerated while maintaining the
maximum BER of the application. (G)
Maximum reflectance at receiver:
Although is defined in G.698.2, this parameter is not supported by
this draft.
4.1.5. Alarms and Threshold definition
This section describes the Alarms and the Thresholds at Ss and Rs
points according to ITU-T Recommendations G.798 [ITU.G798], G.874
[ITU.G874], and G.874.1 [ITU.G874.1].
OTN alarms defined in RFC3591:
Threshold Crossing Alert (TCA Alarm)
LOW-TXPOWER
HIGH-TXPOWER
LOW-RXPOWER
HIGH-RXPOWER
Loss of Signal (LOS)
Loss of Frame (LOF)
Server Signal Failure-P (SSF-P)
Loss of Multiframe (LOM)
OTN Thresholds (for TCA) defined in RFC3591
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
LOW-TXPOWER
HIGH-TXPOWER
LOW-RXPOWER
HIGH-RXPOWER
As the above parameters/alarms are already defined in RFC3591, they
are out of scope of this document and the RFC3591 will continue to be
the only reference for them
The list below reports the new Alarms and Thresholds not managed in
RFC3591
4.1.6. Performance Monitoring (PM) description
This section describes the Performance Monitoring parameters and
their thresholds at Ss and Rs points (Near -End and Far-End)according
to ITU-T Recommendations G.826 [ITU.G826], G.8201 [ITU.G8201], G.709
[ITU.G709], G.798 [ITU.G798], G.874 [ITU.G874], and G.874.1
[ITU.G874.1].
EDITOR NOTE: The list of PM parameters in this section needs to be
revised. Should only include those PM parameters resulted from the
defects and PM primitives specified in G.798 clauses 12.2.2 and
12.3.1.
Failure Counts (fc) :
Number of Failures occurred in an observation periond (G)
Errored Seconds (es) :
It is a one-second period in which one or more bits are in error
or during which Loss of Signal (LOS) or Alarm Indication Signal
(AIS) is detected (G)
Severely Errored Seconds (ses) :
It is a one-second period which has a bit-error ratio =
1x10Eminus3 or during which Loss of Signal (LOS) or Alarm
Indication Signal (AIS) is detected (G)
Unavailable Seconds (uas) :
A period of unavailable time begins at the onset of ten
consecutive SES events. These ten seconds are considered to be
part of unavailable time. A new period of available time begins
at the onset of ten consecutive non-SES events. These ten seconds
are considered to be part of available time (G)
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
Background Block Errors (bbe) :
An errored block not occurring as part of an SES(G)
Error Seconds Ratio (esr) :
The ratio of ES in available time to total seconds in available
time during a fixed measurement interval(G)
Severely Errored Seconds Ratio (sesr) :
The ratio of SES in available time to total seconds in available
time during a fixed measurement interval(G)
Background Block Errored Seconds Ratio (bber) :
The ratio of Background Block Errors (BBE) to total blocks in
available time during a fixed measurement interval. The count of
total blocks excludes all blocks during SESs.(G)
FEC corrected Bit Error (FECcorrErr):
The number of bits corrected by the FEC are counted over one
second (G)
FEC un-corrected Bit Error :
The number of bits un-corrected by the FEC are counted over one
second (G)
Pre-FEC Bit Error :
The number of Errored bits at receiving side before the FEC
function counted over one second (G)
OTN Valid Intervals :
The number of contiguous 15 minute intervals for which valid OTN
performance monitoring data is available for the particular
interface (G)
FEC Valid Intervals :
The number of contiguous 15 minute intervals for which valid FEC
PM data is available for the particular interface.(G)
4.1.7. Generic Parameter description
This section describes the Generic Parameters at Ss and Rs points
according to ITU-T Recommendations G.872 [ITU.G872], G.709
[ITU.G709], G.798 [ITU.G798], G.874 [ITU.G874], and G.874.1
[ITU.G874.1].
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
Interface Admin Status :
The Administrative Status of an Interface: Up/Down - In Service/
Out of Service (can be Automatic in Service) (G/S)
Interface Operational Status :
The Operational Status of an Interface: Up/Down - In Service/Out
of Service (G)
4.2. Use of ifTable
This section specifies how the MIB II interfaces group, as defined in
RFC 2863 [RFC2863], is used for the link ends of a black link. Only
the ifGeneralInformationGroup will be supported for the ifTable and
the ifStackTable to maintain the relationship between the OChr and
OPS layers. The OChr and OPS layers are managed in the ifTable using
IfEntries that correlate to the layers depicted in Figure T.B.D. For
example, a device with TX and/or RX will have an Optical Physical
Section (OPS) layer, and an Optical Channel with reduced
functionality (OChr) layer. There is a one to one relationship
between the OPS and OChr layers.
EDITOR NOTE: more to be provided
4.2.1. Use of ifTable
Use of ifTable for OPS Layer
4.2.2. Use of ifTable
Use of ifTable for OChr Layer
4.2.3. Use of ifTable
Use of ifStackTable
5. Structure of the MIB Module
EDITOR NOTE:text will be provided based on the MIB module in Section
6
6. Object Definitions
EDITOR NOTE: Once the scope in Section 1 and the parameters in
Section 4 are finalized, a MIB module will be defined. It could be
an extension to the OPT-IF-MIB module of RFC 3591. >>>
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
OPT-IF-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN
IMPORTS
MODULE-IDENTITY, OBJECT-TYPE, Gauge32, Integer32,
Unsigned32, transmission
FROM SNMPv2-SMI
TEXTUAL-CONVENTION, RowPointer, RowStatus, TruthValue
FROM SNMPv2-TC
SnmpAdminString
FROM SNMP-FRAMEWORK-MIB
MODULE-COMPLIANCE, OBJECT-GROUP
FROM SNMPv2-CONF
ifIndex
FROM IF-MIB;
-- This is the MIB module for the optical parameters associated with the
black link end points.
7. Relationship to Other MIB Modules
7.1. Relationship to the [TEMPLATE TODO] MIB
7.2. MIB modules required for IMPORTS
8. Definitions
[TEMPLATE TODO]: put your valid MIB module here.
A list of tools that can help automate the process of
checking MIB definitions can be found at
http://www.ops.ietf.org/mib-review-tools.html
9. 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:
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
o
There are no management objects defined in this MIB module that have
a MAX-ACCESS clause of read-write and/or read-create. So, if this
MIB module is implemented correctly, then there is no risk that an
intruder can alter or create any management objects of this MIB
module via direct SNMP SET operations.
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.
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.
10. IANA Considerations
Option #1:
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
The MIB module in this document uses the following IANA-assigned
OBJECT IDENTIFIER values recorded in the SMI Numbers registry:
Descriptor OBJECT IDENTIFIER value
---------- -----------------------
sampleMIB { mib-2 XXX }
Option #2:
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.
Note well: prior to official assignment by the IANA, an internet
draft MUST use placeholders (such as "XXX" above) rather than actual
numbers. See RFC4181 Section 4.5 for an example of how this is done
in an internet draft MIB module.
Option #3:
This memo includes no request to IANA.
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
11. Contributors
Arnold Mattheus
Deutsche Telekom
Darmstadt
Germany
email a.mattheus@telekom.de
Manuel Paul
Deutsche Telekom
Berlin
Germany
email Manuel.Paul@telekom.de
Frank Luennemann
Deutsche Telekom
Munster
Germany
email Frank.Luennemann@telekom.de
Najam Saquib
Cisco
Ludwig-Erhard-Strasse 3
ESCHBORN, HESSEN 65760
GERMANY
email nasaquib@cisco.com
Walid Wakim
Cisco
9501 Technology Blvd
ROSEMONT, ILLINOIS 60018
UNITED STATES
email wwakim@cisco.com
Ori Gerstel
Cisco
32 HaMelacha St., (HaSharon Bldg)
SOUTH NETANYA, HAMERKAZ 42504
ISRAEL
email ogerstel@cisco.com
12. References
12.1. Normative References
[RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group
MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000.
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[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.
[RFC2580] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., and J. Schoenwaelder,
"Conformance Statements for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580,
April 1999.
[RFC3591] Lam, H-K., Stewart, M., and A. Huynh, "Definitions of
Managed Objects for the Optical Interface Type", RFC 3591,
September 2003.
[ITU.G698.2]
International Telecommunications Union, "Amplified
multichannel dense wavelength division multiplexing
applications with single channel optical interfaces", ITU-
T Recommendation G.698.2, November 2009.
[ITU.G709]
International Telecommunications Union, "Interface for the
Optical Transport Network (OTN)", ITU-T Recommendation
G.709, March 2003.
[ITU.G872]
International Telecommunications Union, "Architecture of
optical transport networks", ITU-T Recommendation G.872,
November 2001.
[ITU.G798]
International Telecommunications Union, "Characteristics
of optical transport network hierarchy equipment
functional blocks", ITU-T Recommendation G.798,
October 2010.
[ITU.G874]
International Telecommunications Union, "Management
aspects of optical transport network elements", ITU-
T Recommendation G.874, July 2010.
[ITU.G874.1]
International Telecommunications Union, "Optical transport
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
network (OTN): Protocol-neutral management information
model for the network element view", ITU-T Recommendation
G.874.1, January 2002.
[ITU.G959.1]
International Telecommunications Union, "Optical transport
network physical layer interfaces", ITU-T Recommendation
G.959.1, November 2009.
[ITU.G826]
International Telecommunications Union, "End-to-end error
performance parameters and objectives for international,
constant bit-rate digital paths and connections", ITU-
T Recommendation G.826, November 2009.
[ITU.G8201]
International Telecommunications Union, "Error performance
parameters and objectives for multi-operator international
paths within the Optical Transport Network (OTN)", ITU-
T Recommendation G.8201, September 2003.
[ITU.G694.1]
International Telecommunications Union, "Spectral grids
for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid", ITU-
T Recommendation G.694.1, June 2002.
[ITU.G7710]
International Telecommunications Union, "Common equipment
management function requirements", ITU-T Recommendation
G.7710, May 2008.
12.2. 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.
[RFC2629] Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629,
June 1999.
[RFC4181] Heard, C., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of MIB
Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, September 2005.
[I-D.kunze-g-698-2-management-control-framework]
Kunze, R., "A framework for Management and Control of
optical interfaces supporting G.698.2",
draft-kunze-g-698-2-management-control-framework-00 (work
in progress), July 2011.
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
[RFC4054] Strand, J. and A. Chiu, "Impairments and Other Constraints
on Optical Layer Routing", RFC 4054, May 2005.
Appendix A. Change Log
This optional section should be removed before the internet draft is
submitted to the IESG for publication as an RFC.
Note to RFC Editor: please remove this appendix before publication as
an RFC.
Appendix B. Open Issues
Note to RFC Editor: please remove this appendix before publication as
an RFC.
Authors' Addresses
Gabriele Galimberti (editor)
Cisco
Via Philips,12
20052 - Monza
Italy
Phone: +390392091462
Email: ggalimbe@cisco.com
Ruediger Kunze (editor)
Deutsche Telekom
Dddd, xx
Berlin
Germany
Phone: +49xxxxxxxxxx
Email: RKunze@telekom.de
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01 October 2011
Hing-Kam Lam (editor)
Alcatel-Lucent
D, x
New Jersey
USA
Phone: +19085820672
Email: kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com
G.Galimberti, et al. Expires May 3, 2012 [Page 22]
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-24 16:24:14 |