Internet Engineering Task Force D. Harrington, Ed. Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies (USA) Intended status: Best Current January 8, 2007 Practice Expires: July 12, 2007 A Template for Documents Containing a MIB Module draft-harrington-text-mib-doc-template-02 Status of This Memo By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. 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/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on July 12, 2007. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Abstract This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols. In particular it defines objects for managing [TODO]. [TODO]: describe what functionality will be managed using this MIB module. It can be good to mention the protocol being managed, and whether there is a particular aspect of the protocol to be managed, Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 1] Internet-Draft MIB Module Document Text Template January 2007 or a particular goal of the module. But keep it brief. Note: Forward to RFC Editor Note to RFC Editor - throughout this template, there are numerouse sample "Note to RFC Editor" that should NOT be removed from this template before publication of the template. These need to retain the "Note to RFC Editor" format to match the boilerplate included in the template. For simplicity, there are NO notes to the RFC Editor in this document that should be removed, except THIS section - the complete section entitled "Note: Foreward to RFC Editor". Note: Foreword to template users This template helps authors write the surrounding text needed in a MIB module document, but does not provide a template for writing the MIB module itself. Throughout this template, the marker "[TODO]" is used as a reminder to the template user to indicate an element or text that requires replacement or removal by the template user before submission to the internet draft editor. All [TODO] markers should be resolved and removed before you submit your document to the internet-draft editor. [TODO] THIS section, the complete section entitled "Note: Foreward to template users" should be removed by the template user from their document before submission. [TODO] Remove all page headings from the template document, and replace them with the appropriate headings for your document. For updated information on MIB module guidelines and templates, see [RFC4181] and http://www.ops.ietf.org/. For information on writing internet drafts or RFCs, see http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt and RFC2223(bis), and look at http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html for issues to note when writing drafts. This template is not meant to be a conclusive list of everything needed to write MIB module documents, but to summarize the often- needed basic features to get a document containing a MIB module started. An important purpose of the template is to aid authors in developing a document that is laid out in a manner consistent with other documents containing MIB modules. Documents submitted for advancement to the standards track typically require review by a MIB Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 2] Internet-Draft MIB Module Document Text Template January 2007 Doctor. This template standardizes the layout and naming of sections, includes the appropriate boilerplate text, and facilitates the development of tools to automate the checking of MIB module documents, to speed the WG and IESG review processes. An XML template is also available. For information on XML2RFC, see RFC2629 [RFC2629], http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/html/rfc2629.html and "bis": http://xml.resource.org/authoring/draft-mrose-writing-rfcs.html. Also see http://xml.resource.org/authoring/README.html for 'rfc' option strings. The benefit of using the XML version of the template is that comments in the XML describe how to fill in each section of the template, and then XML2RFC will generate the actual internet- draft with your information. XML2RFC automatically handles much of the boilerplate, references, and idnits issues for you. [TODO]: please remove this Note prior to publication. Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 3] Internet-Draft MIB Module Document Text Template January 2007 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Structure of the MIB Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5.1. Textual Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5.2. The [TODO] Subtree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5.3. The Notifications Subtree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Relationship to Other MIB Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.1. Relationship to the SNMPv2-MIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.2. Relationship to the IF-MIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.3. MIB modules required for IMPORTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 10. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Appendix A. Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Appendix B. Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 4] Internet-Draft MIB Module Document Text Template January 2007 1. Introduction This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB) for use with network management protocols. In particular it defines objects for managing the [TODO] 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]. 4. Overview [TODO] The narrative part MUST include an overview section that describes the scope and field of application of the MIB modules defined by the specification. See RFC4181 section 3.2 for a discussion of the Narrative section 5. Structure of the MIB Module [TODO] The narrative part SHOULD include one or more sections to briefly describe the structure of the MIB modules defined in the specification. 5.1. Textual Conventions 5.2. The [TODO] Subtree [TODO] copy this section for each subtree in the MIB module, and describe the purpose of the subtree. For example, the fooStats subtree provides information for identifying fault conditions and performance degradation of the foo functionality. Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 5] Internet-Draft MIB Module Document Text Template January 2007 5.3. The Notifications Subtree [TODO] describe the notifications defined in the MIB module, and their purpose. 6. Relationship to Other MIB Modules [TODO]: The narrative part MUST include a section that specifies the relationship (if any) of the MIB modules contained in this document to other standards, particularly to standards containing other MIB modules. [TODO] If the MIB modules defined by the specification import definitions from other MIB modules or are always implemented in conjunction with other MIB modules, then those facts must be noted in the narrataive section, as must any special interpretations of objects in other MIB modules. Note that citations may NOT be put into the MIB module portions of the document, but documents used for Imported items are Normative references, so the citations must exist in the narrative section of the document. For example, some modules are always implemented in conjunction with the IF-MIB [RFC2863] and are REQUIRED to document how certain objects in the IF-MIB are used. In addition, media-specific MIB modules that rely on the ifStackTable [RFC2863] and the ifInvStackTable [RFC2864] to maintain information regarding configuration and multiplexing of interface sublayers MUST contain a description of the layering model. Some management objects defined in other MIB modules are applicable to an entity implementing this MIB. In particular, it is assumed that an entity implementing the SAMPLE-MIB module will also implement the 'system' group of the SNMPv2-MIB [RFC3418] and the 'interfaces' group of the IF-MIB [RFC2863]. 6.1. Relationship to the SNMPv2-MIB The 'system' group in the SNMPv2-MIB [RFC3418] is defined as being mandatory for all systems, and the objects apply to the entity as a whole. The 'system' group provides identification of the management entity and certain other system-wide data. The SAMPLE-MIB does not duplicate those objects. 6.2. Relationship to the IF-MIB [TODO] This section is included as an example; If the MIB module is not an adjunct of the Interface MIB, then this section should be removed. The Interface MIB [RFC2863] requires that any MIB module which is an Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 6] Internet-Draft MIB Module Document Text Template January 2007 adjunct of the Interface MIB clarify specific areas within the Interface MIB. These areas were intentionally left vague in the Interface MIB to avoid over constraining the MIB, thereby precluding management of certain media-types. Section 4 of [RFC2863] enumerates several areas which a media- specific MIB must clarify. The implementor is referred to [RFC2863] in order to understand the general intent of these areas. 6.3. MIB modules required for IMPORTS [TODO]: Citations are not permitted within a MIB module, but any module mentioned in an IMPORTS clause or document mentioned in a REFERENCE clause is a Normative reference, and must be cited someplace within the narrative sections. If there are imported items in the MIB module, such as Textual Conventions, that are not already cited, they can be cited in text here. Since relationships to other MIB modules should be described in the narrative text, this section is typically used to cite modules from which Textual Conventions are imported. The following MIB module IMPORTS objects from SNMPv2-SMI [RFC2578], SNMPv2-TC [RFC2579], SNMPv2-CONF [RFC2580], and IF-MIB [RFC2863] 7. Definitions [TODO]: put your valid MIB module here. A list of MIB verification tools is available at http://tools.ietf.org/ 8. Security Considerations [TODO] Each specification that defines one or more MIB modules MUST contain a section that discusses security considerations relevant to those modules. This section MUST be patterned after the latest approved template (available at http://www.ops.ietf.org/mib-security.html). Remember that the objective is not to blindly copy text from the template, but rather to think and evaluate the risks/vulnerabilities and then state/ document the result of this evaluation. [TODO] if you have any read-write and/or read-create objects, please include the following boilerplate paragraph. 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 Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 7] Internet-Draft MIB Module Document Text Template January 2007 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: o [TODO] writeable MIB objects that could be especially disruptive if abused MUST be explicitly listed by name and the associated security risks MUST be spelled out; RFC 2669 has a very good example. o [TODO] list the writable tables and objects and state why they are sensitive. [TODO] else if there are no read-write objects in your MIB module, use the following boilerplate paragraph. 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. [TODO] if you have any sensitive readable objects, please include the following boilerplate paragraph. 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: o [TODO] you must explicitly list by name any readable objects that are sensitive or vulnerable and the associated security risks MUST be spelled out (for instance, if they might reveal customer information or violate personal privacy laws such as those of the European Union if exposed to unathorized parties) o [TODO] list the tables and objects and state why they are sensitive. [TODO] discuss what security the protocol used to carry the information should have. The following three boilerplate paragraphs should not be changed without very good reason. Changes will almost certainly require justification during IESG review. Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 8] Internet-Draft MIB Module Document Text Template January 2007 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. 9. IANA Considerations [TODO] In order to comply with IESG policy as set forth in http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html, every Internet-Draft that is submitted to the IESG for publication MUST contain an IANA Considerations section. The requirements for this section vary depending what actions are required of the IANA. see RFC4181 section 3.5 for more information on writing an IANA clause for a MIB module document. [TODO} select an option and provide the necessary details. Option #1: 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" Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 9] Internet-Draft MIB Module Document Text Template January 2007 (here and in the MIB module) with the assigned value and to remove this note. Note well: prior to official assignment by the IANA, a draft document 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 a draft MIB module. Option #3: This memo includes no request to IANA. 10. Contributors This template is based on contributions from the MIb Doctors, especially Juergen Schoenwaelder, Dave Perkins, C.M.Heard and Randy Presuhn. 11. Acknowledgements Thanks to Marshall Rose for developing the XML2RFC format. [TODO]This acknowledgement can be removed from your MIB module document. 12. References 12.1. Normative References [RFC2629] Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629, June 1999. [RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000. [RFC3418] Presuhn, R., "Management Information Base (MIB) for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)", STD 62, RFC 3418, December 2002. [RFC4181] Heard, C., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of MIB Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, September 2005. [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. Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 10] Internet-Draft MIB Module Document Text Template January 2007 [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. 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. Appendix A. Change Log The following changes have been made from draft-xxx-xxx-xxx-12 . [TODO] replace this list with your own list 1. Updated the introductry boilerplate text, the security considerations section and the references to comply with the current IETF standards and guidelines. 2. Additions and clarifications in various description clauses. Appendix B. Open Issues [TODO] This list of open issues should be cleared and removed before this document hits the IESG. 1. Contributor addresses need to be updated Author's Address David Harrington (editor) Huawei Technologies (USA) 1700 Alma Drive, Suite 100 Plano, TX 75075 USA Phone: +1 603 436 8634 EMail: dharrington@huawei.com Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 11] Internet-Draft MIB Module Document Text Template January 2007 Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). 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, THE IETF TRUST 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). Harrington Expires July 12, 2007 [Page 12]