RFC 5542
Definitions of Textual Conventions for Pseudowire (PW) Management
RFC 5542 🎀 Definitions of Textual Conventions for Pseudowire (PW) Management
okay bestie, so this is RFC 5542 💖, called Definitions of Textual Conventions for Pseudowire (PW) Management. It's a Standards Track document from May 2009 🌸, and it came from the Network Working Group. Three editors wrote it: T. Nadeau (BT), D. Zelig (Oversi), and O. Nicklass (RADVISION) ✨. Nothing in its header says it obsoletes or updates another RFC, so it's standing on its own 💅.
Status of This Memo ✨
This document is a standards track protocol spec for the Internet community 🦋. It's asking for discussion and suggestions for improvements 💬. For the current standardization state and status of this protocol, go check the latest edition of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) 📚. Distribution of this memo is unlimited 🌈.
Copyright Notice 🔥
Copyright (c) 2009 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, which are in effect on the date this document was published. You can find them at http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info. Please read these carefully, because they describe your rights and restrictions for this document 🙈.
This document may include material from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions that were published or made publicly available before November 10, 2008 🧚. The person or people who control the copyright in some of that material might not have given the IETF Trust permission to allow changes to it outside the IETF Standards Process 😭. Without getting a proper license from whoever controls the copyright in that material, this document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards Process. The one exceptions are formatting it for publication as an RFC or translating it into languages other than English 🫶.
Abstract 🦋
This memo defines a Management Information Base (MIB) module that has textual conventions (TCs) for representing commonly used pseudowire (PW) management information 🍓. The goal is for these TCs to be imported and used by PW-related MIB modules, which would otherwise have to define their own representations 🔥.
Table of Contents 🌸
1. Introduction ....................................................2
2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework ......................2
3. Conventions Used in This Document ...............................2
4. Object Definitions ..............................................3
5. Security Considerations .........................................9
6. IANA Considerations .............................................9
7. References .....................................................10
7.1. Normative References ......................................10
7.2. Informative References ....................................101. Introduction 💖
This memo defines a piece of the Management Information Base (MIB) for network management protocols used in the Internet community 🌐. Specifically, it defines the textual conventions used for pseudowire (PW) technology and for Pseudowire Edge-to-Edge Emulation (PWE3) MIB modules ✨.
2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework 🎀
If you want a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current Internet-Standard Management Framework, check out section 7 of RFC 3410 [RFC3410] 📖.
Managed objects are accessed through a virtual information store called the Management Information Base, or MIB 🧚. MIB objects are usually accessed through the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) 💜. Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms in the Structure of Management Information (SMI) 🌈. This memo specifies a MIB module that is compliant with SMIv2, which is described in STD 58, RFC 2578 [RFC2578], STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579], and STD 58, RFC 2580 [RFC2580] 👑.
3. Conventions Used in This Document 🦋
Okay, the BCP 14 key words are the important ones here 🔥. 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 [RFC2119] 💅.
4. Object Definitions ✨
okay so this is the actual MIB module, the bit where everything gets defined 🎀 it's a whole PW-TC-STD-MIB module that imports stuff from SNMPv2-SMI and SNMPv2-TC, and then it's basically a big drawer of textual conventions for pseudowire stuff. the module's own metadata is up top (who wrote it, when, the legal boilerplate), and then each convention gets its own little definition, from PwGroupID all the way down to PwCfgIndexOrzero 🧚
PW-TC-STD-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN
IMPORTS
MODULE-IDENTITY, Unsigned32, mib-2
FROM SNMPv2-SMI -- [RFC2578]
TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
FROM SNMPv2-TC; -- [RFC2579]
pwTcStdMIB MODULE-IDENTITY
LAST-UPDATED "200904210000Z" -- 21 April 2009 00:00:00 GMT
ORGANIZATION "Pseudowire Edge-to-Edge Emulation (PWE3) Working
Group"
CONTACT-INFO
" Thomas D. Nadeau
Email: tom.nadeau@bt.com
David Zelig
Email: davidz@oversi.com
Orly Nicklass
Email: orlyn@radvision.com
The PWE3 Working Group (email distribution pwe3@ietf.org,
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/pwe3-charter.html)
"
DESCRIPTION
"This MIB module defines TEXTUAL-CONVENTIONS
for concepts used in pseudowire edge-to-edge
networks.
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified
as authors of the code. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or
without modification, are permitted provided that the following
conditions are met:
- Redistributions of source code must retain the above
copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following
disclaimer.
- Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above
copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following
disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials
provided with the distribution.
- Neither the name of Internet Society, IETF or IETF Trust, nor
the names of specific contributors, may be used to endorse or
promote products derived from this software without specific
prior written permission.
THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND
CONTRIBUTORS 'AS IS' AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES,
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE
DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR
CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT
NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES;
LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN
CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR
OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE,
EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
This version of this MIB module is part of RFC 5542;
see the RFC itself for full legal notices."
-- Revision history.
REVISION "200904210000Z" -- 21 April 2009 00:00:00 GMT
DESCRIPTION
"Original Version"
::= { mib-2 188 }
PwGroupID ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
DISPLAY-HINT "d"
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"An administrative identification for grouping a
set of service-specific pseudowire services."
SYNTAX Unsigned32
PwIDType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
DISPLAY-HINT "d"
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Pseudowire Identifier. Used to identify the PW
(together with some other fields) in the signaling
session."
SYNTAX Unsigned32
PwIndexType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
DISPLAY-HINT "d"
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Pseudowire Index. A unique value, greater than zero,
for each locally defined PW. Used for indexing
several MIB tables associated with the particular PW.
It is recommended that values are assigned contiguously
starting from 1. The value for each PW MUST remain
constant at least from one re-initialization
to the next re-initialization."
SYNTAX Unsigned32 (1..4294967295)
PwIndexOrZeroType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
DISPLAY-HINT "d"
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"This TEXTUAL-CONVENTION is an extension of the
PwIndexType convention. The latter defines a greater-
than-zero value used to identify a pseudowire
in the managed system. This extension permits the
additional value of zero. The zero value is object-specific
and MUST therefore be defined as part of the description of
any object that uses this syntax. Examples of the usage of
zero might include situations where pseudowire was unknown,
or where none or all pseudowires need to be referenced."
SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..4294967295)
PwOperStatusTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Indicates the operational status of the PW.
- up(1): Ready to pass packets.
- down(2): PW signaling is not yet finished, or
indications available at the service
level indicate that the PW is not
passing packets.
- testing(3): AdminStatus at the PW level is set to
test.
- dormant(4): The PW is not in a condition to pass
packets but is in a 'pending' state,
waiting for some external event.
- notPresent(5): Some component is missing to accomplish
the setup of the PW. It can be
configuration error, incomplete
configuration, or a missing H/W component.
- lowerLayerDown(6): One or more of the lower-layer interfaces
responsible for running the underlying PSN
is not in OperStatus 'up' state."
SYNTAX INTEGER {
up(1),
down(2),
testing(3),
dormant(4),
notPresent(5),
lowerLayerDown(6)
}
PwAttachmentIdentifierType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"An octet string used in the generalized Forward Error
Correction (FEC) element for identifying attachment forwarder
and groups. A NULL identifier is of zero length.
"
SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..255))
PwGenIdType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Represents the Attachment Group Identifier (AGI) Type and
Attachment Individual Identifier (AII) Type in generalized FEC
signaling and configuration.
"
SYNTAX Unsigned32( 0..254 )
PwCwStatusTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Indicates the status of the control word (CW) negotiation
based on the local configuration and the indications received
from the peer node.
waitingForNextMsg(1) indicates that the node is waiting for
another label mapping from the peer.
sentWrongBitErrorCode(2) indicates that the local node has
notified the peer about a mismatch in the C-bit.
rxWithdrawWithWrongBitErrorCode(3) indicates that a withdraw
message has been received with the wrong C-bit error code.
illegalReceivedBit(4) indicates a C-bit configuration with
the peer that is not compatible with the PW type.
cwPresent(5) indicates that the CW is present for this PW.
If signaling is used, the C-bit is set and agreed upon between
the nodes. For manually configured PW, the local
configuration requires the use of the CW.
cwNotPresent(6) indicates that the CW is not present for this
PW. If signaling is used, the C-bit is reset and agreed upon
between the nodes. For manually configured PW, the local
configuration requires that the CW not be used.
notYetKnown(7) indicates that a label mapping has not yet
been received from the peer.
"
REFERENCE
"Martini, et al., 'Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance Using
the Label Distribution Protocol', [RFC4447]."
SYNTAX INTEGER {
waitingForNextMsg(1),
sentWrongBitErrorCode(2),
rxWithdrawWithWrongBitErrorCode(3),
illegalReceivedBit(4),
cwPresent(5),
cwNotPresent(6),
notYetKnown(7)
}
PwStatus ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Indicates the status of the PW and the interfaces affecting
this PW. If none of the bits are set, it indicates no faults
are reported.
"
SYNTAX BITS {
pwNotForwarding(0),
servicePwRxFault(1),
servicePwTxFault(2),
psnPwRxFault(3),
psnPwTxFault(4)
}
PwFragSize ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
DISPLAY-HINT "d"
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"If set to a value other than zero, it indicates the desired
fragmentation length in bytes. If set to zero,
fragmentation is not desired for PSN bound packets.
"
SYNTAX Unsigned32
PwFragStatus ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Indicates the status of the fragmentation/reassembly process
based on local configuration and peer capability.
noFrag(0) bit indicates that local configuration is for no
fragmentation.
cfgFragGreaterThanPsnMtu(1) bit indicates that the local node
is set to fragment, but the fragmentation size is greater
than the MTU available at the PSN between the nodes.
Fragmentation is not done in this case.
cfgFragButRemoteIncapable(2) bit indicates that the local
configuration conveys the desire for fragmentation but
the peer is not capable of reassembly.
remoteFragCapable(3) bit indicates that the remote node
is capable to accept fragmented PDUs.
fragEnabled(4) bit indicates that fragmentation will be used
on this PW. Fragmentation can be used if the local node was
configured for fragmentation, the peer has the capability
to accept fragmented packets, and the CW is in use for this
PW."
REFERENCE
"Malis, A. and M. Townsley, 'Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-
Edge (PWE3) Fragmentation and Reassembly', [RFC4623]."
SYNTAX BITS {
noFrag(0),
cfgFragGreaterThanPsnMtu(1),
cfgFragButRemoteIncapable(2),
remoteFragCapable(3),
fragEnabled(4)
}
PwCfgIndexOrzero ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
DISPLAY-HINT "d"
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Index in any of the relevant configuration tables for
supplement information regarding configuration of the
specific technology. Value zero implies no additional
configuration information is applicable."
SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..4294967295)
END5. Security Considerations 💀
okay this one's short but it's SO important, so listen up 👑 this module doesn't define any management objects at all. what it does instead is define a set of textual conventions that other PWE3 MIB modules can use when they go define their management objects 🫶
meaningful security considerations can only be written in the MIB modules that actually define management objects. so this document, on its own, has no impact on the security of the Internet. that's the whole thing, bestie, the security story lives in the modules that use these conventions, not here 🔒✨
6. IANA Considerations ✨
okay bestie, IANA stuff time 🎀 the MIB module in this document uses one OBJECT IDENTIFIER value that's already been assigned by IANA and recorded in the SMI Numbers registry 🦋 it's giving official paperwork energy, and the value is:
Descriptor OBJECT IDENTIFIER value
---------- -----------------------
pwTcStdMIB { mib-2 188 }so the descriptor pwTcStdMIB is the one to know, and it lives at { mib-2 188 } 💖
7. References 📚
7.1. Normative References 💅
these are the must-read refs, the ones the doc leans on hard 🔥
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 🌸 this is the one that explains the capital-letter key words, so it's literally the reason I've been yelling MUST all over the place 😭
[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. 💜
[RFC4447] Martini, L., Ed., Rosen, E., El-Aawar, N., Smith, T., and G. Heron, "Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance Using the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)", RFC 4447, April 2006. 🦋
[RFC4623] Malis, A. and M. Townsley, "Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) Fragmentation and Reassembly", RFC 4623, August 2006. ✨
7.2. Informative References 🌈
this one's more of a "go read this if you want the big picture" vibe 🫶
[RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart, "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet-Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, December 2002. 👑
Authors' Addresses 🎀
the people who wrote this, with their contact deets 💅
Thomas D. Nadeau (editor) BT BT Centre 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ United Kingdom
EMail: tom.nadeau@bt.com
David Zelig (editor) Oversi Networks 1 Rishon Letzion St. Petah Tikva Israel
Phone: +972 77 3337 750 EMail: davidz@oversi.com
Orly Nicklass (editor) RADVISION 24 Raul Wallenberg Tel Aviv
Phone: +972 3 776 9444 EMail: orlyn@radvision.com
okay that's the whole doc bestie, the authors are the legends who made it happen 🫶🌈💖
📦 where this page comes from
- ietf: rfc5542 2009-05
- 💖 girlified by claude-haiku-5-5 on : a language model's rewrite of the original, under its terms