rfc4625
Network Working Group C. DeSanti
Request for Comments: 4625 K. McCloghrie
Category: Standards Track Cisco Systems
S. Kode
Consultant
S. Gai
Retired
September 2006
Fibre Channel Routing Information MIB
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 (2006).
Abstract
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
for use with network management protocols in the Internet community.
In particular, it describes managed objects for information related
to routing within a Fibre Channel fabric, which is independent of the
usage of a particular routing protocol.
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. The Internet-Standard Management Framework ......................3
3. Short Overview of Fibre Channel .................................3
3.1. Introduction ...............................................3
3.2. Routing Protocols ..........................................4
3.3. Virtual Fabrics ............................................4
4. Relationship to Other MIBs ......................................5
5. MIB Overview ....................................................5
5.1. Fibre Channel Management Instance ..........................5
5.2. Switch Index ...............................................6
5.3. Fabric Index ...............................................6
5.4. The t11FcRouteGroup Group ..................................6
5.5. The t11FcRouteTable's INDEX ................................6
6. The T11-FC-ROUTE-MIB Module .....................................7
7. Acknowledgements ...............................................17
8. IANA Considerations ............................................17
9. Security Considerations ........................................17
10. Normative References ..........................................19
11. Informative References ........................................20
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
1. Introduction
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
for use with network management protocols in the Internet community.
In particular, it describes managed objects for information related
to the Fibre Channel network's Routing Table for routing within a
Fabric. Managed objects specific to particular routing protocols,
such as the Fabric Shortest Path First (FSPF) protocol [FC-SW-4], are
not specified in this MIB module.
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].
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. Short Overview of Fibre Channel
3.1. Introduction
The Fibre Channel (FC) is logically a bidirectional point-to-point
serial data channel, structured for high performance. Fibre Channel
provides a general transport vehicle for higher-level protocols, such
as Small Computer System Interface (SCSI) command sets, the High-
Performance Parallel Interface (HIPPI) data framing, IP (Internet
Protocol), IEEE 802.2, and others.
Physically, Fibre Channel is an interconnection of multiple
communication points, called N_Ports, interconnected either by a
switching network, called a Fabric, or by a point-to-point link. A
Fibre Channel "node" consists of one or more N_Ports. A Fabric may
consist of multiple Interconnect Elements, some of which are
switches. An N_Port connects to the Fabric via a port on a switch
called an F_Port. When multiple FC nodes are connected to a single
port on a switch via an "Arbitrated Loop" topology, the switch port
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
is called an FL_Port, and the nodes' ports are called NL_Ports. The
term Nx_Port is used to refer to either an N_Port or an NL_Port. The
term Fx_Port is used to refer to either an F_Port or an FL_Port. A
switch port, which is interconnected to another switch port via an
Inter-Switch Link (ISL), is called an E_Port. A B_Port connects a
bridge device with an E_Port on a switch; a B_Port provides a subset
of E_Port functionality.
Many Fibre Channel components, including the fabric, each node, and
most ports, have globally-unique names. These globally-unique names
are typically formatted as World Wide Names (WWNs). More information
on WWNs can be found in [FC-FS]. WWNs are expected to be persistent
across agent and unit resets.
Fibre Channel frames contain 24-bit address identifiers that identify
the frame's source and destination ports. Each FC port has both an
address identifier and a WWN. When a fabric is in use, the FC
address identifiers are dynamic and are assigned by a switch. Each
octet of a 24-bit address represents a level in an address hierarchy,
a Domain_ID being the highest level of the hierarchy.
3.2. Routing Protocols
The routing of frames within the Fabric is normally based on the
standard routing protocol, called the Fabric Shortest Path First
(FSPF) protocol. The operation of FSPF (or of any other routing
protocol) allows a switch to generate and maintain its own routing
table of how to forward frames it receives; i.e., a table in which to
look up the destination address of a received frame in order to
determine the best link by which to forward that frame towards its
destination.
3.3. Virtual Fabrics
The latest standard for an interconnecting Fabric containing multiple
Fabric Switch elements is [FC-SW-4] (which replaces the previous
revision, [FC-SW-3]). [FC-SW-4] carries forward the existing
specification for the operation of a single Fabric in a physical
infrastructure, augmenting it with the definition of Virtual Fabrics
and with the specification of how multiple Virtual Fabrics can
operate within one (or more) physical infrastructures. The use of
Virtual Fabrics provides for each frame to be tagged in its header to
indicate which one of several Virtual Fabrics that frame is being
transmitted on. All frames entering a particular "Core Switch"
[FC-SW-4] (i.e., a physical switch) on the same Virtual Fabric are
processed by the same "Virtual Switch" within that Core switch.
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
4. Relationship to Other MIBs
The first standardized MIB for Fibre Channel [RFC2837] was focussed
on Fibre Channel switches. It is being replaced by the more generic
Fibre Channel Management MIB [FC-MGMT], which defines basic
information for Fibre Channel hosts and switches, including
extensions to the standard IF-MIB [RFC2863] for Fibre Channel
interfaces.
This MIB extends beyond [FC-MGMT] to cover the routing of traffic
within a Fabric of a Fibre Channel network. The standard routing
protocol for Fibre Channel is FSPF [FC-SW-4]. Another MIB [RFC4626]
specifies management information specific to FSPF. This MIB contains
routing information that is independent of FSPF (i.e., it would still
apply even if a routing protocol other than FSPF were in use in the
network).
This MIB imports some common Textual Conventions from T11-TC-MIB,
defined in [RFC4439].
5. MIB Overview
This MIB module provides the means for monitoring the operation of,
and configuring some parameters of, one or more instances of the FSPF
protocol. (Note that there are no definitions in this MIB module of
"managed actions" that can be invoked via SNMP.)
5.1. Fibre Channel Management Instance
A Fibre Channel management instance is defined in [FC-MGMT] as a
separable managed instance of Fibre Channel functionality. Fibre
Channel functionality may be grouped into Fibre Channel management
instances in whatever way is most convenient for the
implementation(s). For example, one such grouping accommodates a
single SNMP agent with multiple AgentX [RFC2741] sub-agents, each
sub-agent implementing a different Fibre Channel management instance.
The object, fcmInstanceIndex, is IMPORTed from the FC-MGMT-MIB
[FC-MGMT] as the index value that uniquely identifies each Fibre
Channel management instance within the same SNMP context ([RFC3411],
Section 3.3.1).
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
5.2. Switch Index
The FC-MGMT-MIB [FC-MGMT] defines the fcmSwitchTable as a table of
information about Fibre Channel switches that are managed by Fibre
Channel management instances. Each Fibre Channel management instance
can manage one or more Fibre Channel switches. The Switch Index,
fcmSwitchIndex, is IMPORTed from the FC-MGMT-MIB as the index value
that uniquely identifies a Fibre Channel switch among those (one or
more) managed by the same Fibre Channel management instance.
5.3. Fabric Index
Whether operating on a physical Fabric (i.e., without Virtual
Fabrics) or within a Virtual Fabric, the operation of FSPF within a
Fabric is identical. Therefore, this MIB defines all Fabric-related
information in tables that are INDEX-ed by an arbitrary integer,
named a "Fabric Index", the syntax of which is IMPORTed from the
T11-TC-MIB. When a device is connected to a single physical Fabric,
without use of any virtual Fabrics, the value of this Fabric Index
will always be 1. In an environment of multiple virtual and/or
physical Fabrics, this index provides a means to distinguish one
Fabric from another.
It is quite possible, and may even be likely, that a Fibre Channel
switch will have ports connected to multiple virtual and/or physical
Fabrics. Thus, in order to simplify a management protocol query
concerning all the Fabrics to which a single switch is connected,
fcmSwitchIndex will be listed before t11FcRouteFabricIndex when they
both appear in the same INDEX clause.
5.4. The t11FcRouteGroup Group
This MIB contains one object group, the t11FcRouteGroup, which
contains objects to allow the displaying and the configuring of
routes in the Fibre Channel Routing tables for the locally managed
switches.
5.5. The t11FcRouteTable's INDEX
It is normally valuable for a MIB table that contains routes to be
ordered such that a management application is able to query the table
based on some attribute, without having to read every row in the MIB
table. This requires that the rows in the table be ordered according
to such attributes, and thus that those attributes be represented by
objects included in the table's INDEX clause. Examples of this can
be seen in the ipCidrRouteTable [RFC2096] and, more recently, the
inetCidrRouteTable in [RFC4292].
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
While this useful feature results in an unusually large number (ten)
of objects in the t11FcRouteTable's INDEX clause, all ten are either
integers or strings of 3 (or zero) octet length, so the resulting
OIDs are not unusually large. (Specifically, the aggregate number of
sub-identifiers to be appended to an OBJECT-TYPE's OID, when naming
an instance of an object in the t11FcRouteTable, is at most 22 sub-
identifiers; i.e., less than the *minimum* number to be appended for
the inetCidrRouteTable table.)
6. The T11-FC-ROUTE-MIB Module
T11-FC-ROUTE-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN
IMPORTS
MODULE-IDENTITY, OBJECT-TYPE,
Unsigned32, mib-2 FROM SNMPv2-SMI -- [RFC2578]
MODULE-COMPLIANCE, OBJECT-GROUP FROM SNMPv2-CONF -- [RFC2580]
RowStatus, TimeStamp,
StorageType FROM SNMPv2-TC -- [RFC2579]
InterfaceIndex, InterfaceIndexOrZero FROM IF-MIB -- [RFC2863]
fcmInstanceIndex, fcmSwitchIndex,
FcAddressIdOrZero, FcDomainIdOrZero FROM FC-MGMT-MIB -- [FC-MGMT]
T11FabricIndex FROM T11-TC-MIB; -- [RFC4439]
t11FcRouteMIB MODULE-IDENTITY
LAST-UPDATED "200608140000Z"
ORGANIZATION "T11"
CONTACT-INFO
" Claudio DeSanti
Cisco Systems, Inc.
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134 USA
EMail: cds@cisco.com
Keith McCloghrie
Cisco Systems, Inc.
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA USA 95134
Email: kzm@cisco.com"
DESCRIPTION
"The MIB module for configuring and displaying Fibre
Channel Route Information.
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). This version
of this MIB module is part of RFC 4625; see the RFC
itself for full legal notices."
REVISION "200608140000Z"
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 7]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
DESCRIPTION
"Initial version of this MIB module, published as RFC4625."
::= {mib-2 144 }
t11FcRouteNotifications OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { t11FcRouteMIB 0 }
t11FcRouteObjects OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { t11FcRouteMIB 1 }
t11FcRouteConformance OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { t11FcRouteMIB 2 }
--
-- Per-Fabric routing information
--
t11FcRouteFabricTable OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF T11FcRouteFabricEntry
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The table containing Fibre Channel Routing information
that is specific to a Fabric."
::= { t11FcRouteObjects 1 }
t11FcRouteFabricEntry OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX T11FcRouteFabricEntry
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Each entry contains routing information specific to a
particular Fabric on a particular switch (identified by
values of fcmInstanceIndex and fcmSwitchIndex)."
INDEX { fcmInstanceIndex, fcmSwitchIndex,
t11FcRouteFabricIndex }
::= { t11FcRouteFabricTable 1 }
T11FcRouteFabricEntry ::=
SEQUENCE {
t11FcRouteFabricIndex T11FabricIndex,
t11FcRouteFabricLastChange TimeStamp
}
t11FcRouteFabricIndex OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX T11FabricIndex
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"A unique index value that uniquely identifies a
particular Fabric.
In a Fabric conformant to FC-SW-3, only a single Fabric
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 8]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
can operate within a physical infrastructure, and thus
the value of this Fabric Index will always be 1.
In a Fabric conformant to FC-SW-4, multiple Virtual Fabrics
can operate within one (or more) physical infrastructures.
In such a case, index value is used to uniquely identify a
particular Fabric within a physical infrastructure."
::= { t11FcRouteFabricEntry 1 }
t11FcRouteFabricLastChange OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX TimeStamp
MAX-ACCESS read-only
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The value of sysUpTime at the most recent time when any
corresponding row in the t11FcRouteTable was created,
modified, or deleted. A corresponding row in the
t11FcRouteTable is for the same management instance,
the same switch, and same Fabric as the row in this table.
If no change has occurred since the last restart of the
management system, then the value of this object is 0."
::= { t11FcRouteFabricEntry 2 }
--
-- Fibre Channel Routing table
--
t11FcRouteTable OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF T11FcRouteEntry
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The Fibre Channel Routing tables for the
locally managed switches. This table lists all the
routes that are configured in and/or computed by any
local switch for any Fabric.
Such routes are used by a switch to forward frames (of user
data) on a Fabric. The conceptual process is based on
extracting the Destination Fibre Channel Address Identifier
(D_ID) out of a received frame (of user data) and comparing
it to each entry of this table that is applicable to the
given switch and Fabric. Such comparison consists of first
performing a logical-AND of the extracted D_ID with a mask
(the value of t11FcRouteDestMask) and second comparing the
result of that 'AND' operation to the value of
t11FcRouteDestAddrId. A similar comparison is made of the
Source Fibre Channel Address Identifier (S_ID) of a frame
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 9]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
against the t11FcRouteSrcAddrId and t11FcRouteSrcMask values
of an entry. If an entry's value of t11FcRouteInInterface
is non-zero, then a further comparison determines if the
frame was received on the appropriate interface. If all of
these comparisons for a particular entry are successful,
then that entry represents a potential route for forwarding
the received frame.
For entries configured by a user, t11FcRouteProto has
the value 'netmgmt'; only entries of this type can be
deleted by the user."
::= { t11FcRouteObjects 2 }
t11FcRouteEntry OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX T11FcRouteEntry
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Each entry contains a route to a particular destination,
possibly from a particular subset of source addresses,
on a particular Fabric via a particular output interface
and learned in a particular manner."
INDEX { fcmInstanceIndex, fcmSwitchIndex,
t11FcRouteFabricIndex,
t11FcRouteDestAddrId, t11FcRouteDestMask,
t11FcRouteSrcAddrId, t11FcRouteSrcMask,
t11FcRouteInInterface, t11FcRouteProto,
t11FcRouteOutInterface }
::= { t11FcRouteTable 1 }
T11FcRouteEntry ::=
SEQUENCE {
t11FcRouteDestAddrId FcAddressIdOrZero,
t11FcRouteDestMask FcAddressIdOrZero,
t11FcRouteSrcAddrId FcAddressIdOrZero,
t11FcRouteSrcMask FcAddressIdOrZero,
t11FcRouteInInterface InterfaceIndexOrZero,
t11FcRouteProto INTEGER,
t11FcRouteOutInterface InterfaceIndex,
t11FcRouteDomainId FcDomainIdOrZero,
t11FcRouteMetric Unsigned32,
t11FcRouteType INTEGER,
t11FcRouteIfDown INTEGER,
t11FcRouteStorageType StorageType,
t11FcRouteRowStatus RowStatus
}
t11FcRouteDestAddrId OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX FcAddressIdOrZero (SIZE (3))
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 10]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The destination Fibre Channel Address Identifier of
this route. A zero-length string for this field is
not allowed."
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 1 }
t11FcRouteDestMask OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX FcAddressIdOrZero
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The mask to be logical-ANDed with a destination
Fibre Channel Address Identifier before it is compared
to the value in the t11FcRouteDestAddrId field.
Allowed values are 255.255.255, 255.255.0, or 255.0.0.
FSPF's definition generates routes to a Domain_ID,
so the mask for all FSPF-generated routes is 255.0.0.
The zero-length value has the same meaning as 0.0.0."
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 2 }
t11FcRouteSrcAddrId OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX FcAddressIdOrZero
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The source Fibre Channel Address Identifier of this
route. Note that if this object and the corresponding
instance of t11FcRouteSrcMask both have a value of 0.0.0,
then this route matches all source addresses. The
zero-length value has the same meaning as 0.0.0."
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 3 }
t11FcRouteSrcMask OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX FcAddressIdOrZero
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The mask to be logical-ANDed with a source
Fibre Channel Address Identifier before it is compared
to the value in the t11FcRouteSrcAddrId field. Allowed
values are 255.255.255, 255.255.0, 255.0.0, or 0.0.0.
The zero-length value has the same meaning as 0.0.0."
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 4 }
t11FcRouteInInterface OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX InterfaceIndexOrZero
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 11]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"If the value of this object is non-zero, it is the
value of ifIndex that identifies the local
Fibre Channel interface through which a frame
must have been received in order to match with
this entry. If the value of this object is zero,
the matching does not require that the frame be
received on any specific interface."
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 5 }
t11FcRouteProto OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX INTEGER {
other(1),
local(2),
netmgmt(3),
fspf(4)
}
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The mechanism via which this route was learned:
other(1) - not specified
local(2) - local interface
netmgmt(3)- static route
fspf(4) - Fibre Shortest Path First
"
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 6 }
t11FcRouteOutInterface OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX InterfaceIndex
MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The value of ifIndex that identifies the local
Fibre Channel interface through which the next hop
of this route is to be reached."
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 7 }
t11FcRouteDomainId OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX FcDomainIdOrZero
MAX-ACCESS read-create
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The domain_ID of next hop switch.
This object can have a value of zero if the value
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 12]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
of t11FcRouteProto is 'local'."
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 8 }
t11FcRouteMetric OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX Unsigned32 (0..65536)
MAX-ACCESS read-create
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The routing metric for this route.
The use of this object is dependent on t11FcRouteProto."
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 9 }
t11FcRouteType OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX INTEGER {
local(1),
remote(2)
}
MAX-ACCESS read-create
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The type of route.
local(1) - a route for which the next Fibre Channel
port is the final destination;
remote(2) - a route for which the next Fibre Channel
port is not the final destination."
DEFVAL {local}
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 10 }
t11FcRouteIfDown OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX INTEGER {
remove(1),
retain(2)
}
MAX-ACCESS read-create
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The value of this object indicates what happens to
this route when the output interface (given by the
corresponding value of t11FcRouteOutInterface) is
operationally 'down'. If this object's value is 'retain',
the route is to be retained in this table. If this
object's value is 'remove', the route is to be removed
from this table."
DEFVAL { retain }
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 11 }
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 13]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
t11FcRouteStorageType OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX StorageType
MAX-ACCESS read-create
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The storage type for this conceptual row.
Conceptual rows having the value 'permanent' need not
allow write-access to any columnar objects in the row."
DEFVAL { nonVolatile }
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 12 }
t11FcRouteRowStatus OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX RowStatus
MAX-ACCESS read-create
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The status of this conceptual row.
The only rows that can be deleted by setting this object to
'destroy' are those for which t11FcRouteProto has the value
'netmgmt'."
::= { t11FcRouteEntry 13 }
--
-- Conformance
--
t11FcRouteCompliances OBJECT IDENTIFIER
::= { t11FcRouteConformance 1 }
t11FcRouteGroups OBJECT IDENTIFIER
::= { t11FcRouteConformance 2 }
t11FcRouteCompliance MODULE-COMPLIANCE
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"The compliance statement for entities that
implement the T11-FC-ROUTE-MIB.
--
-- Note: The next four OBJECT clauses are for auxiliary objects, and the
-- SMIv2 does not permit inclusion of objects that are not accessible
-- in an OBJECT clause (see Sections 3.1 & 5.4.3 in STD 58, RFC 2580).
-- Thus, these four clauses cannot be included below in the normal
-- location for OBJECT clauses.
--
-- OBJECT t11FcRouteSrcAddrId
-- SYNTAX FcAddressIdOrZero (SIZE (0))
-- DESCRIPTION
-- 'Support is not required for routes that
-- match only a subset of possible source
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 14]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
-- addresses.'
--
-- OBJECT t11FcRouteSrcMask
-- SYNTAX FcAddressIdOrZero (SIZE (0))
-- DESCRIPTION
-- 'Support is not required for routes that
-- match only a subset of possible source
-- addresses.'
--
-- OBJECT t11FcRouteDestMask
-- DESCRIPTION
-- 'Support is mandatory only for FSPF-generated
-- routes. Since FSPF's definition generates
-- routes to a Domain_ID, the mask for all
-- FSPF-generated routes is 255.0.0. Thus,
-- support is only required for 255.0.0.'
--
-- OBJECT t11FcRouteInInterface
-- SYNTAX InterfaceIndexOrZero (0)
-- DESCRIPTION
-- 'Support for routes specific to particular
-- source interfaces is not required.'
"
MODULE -- this module
MANDATORY-GROUPS { t11FcRouteGroup }
OBJECT t11FcRouteIfDown
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT t11FcRouteDomainId
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT t11FcRouteMetric
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT t11FcRouteType
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT t11FcRouteStorageType
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 15]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
OBJECT t11FcRouteRowStatus
SYNTAX INTEGER { active(1) }
MIN-ACCESS read-only
DESCRIPTION
"Write access is not required."
::= { t11FcRouteCompliances 1 }
t11FcRouteGroup OBJECT-GROUP
OBJECTS { t11FcRouteFabricLastChange,
t11FcRouteDomainId,
t11FcRouteMetric,
t11FcRouteType,
t11FcRouteIfDown,
t11FcRouteStorageType,
t11FcRouteRowStatus
}
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"A collection of objects for displaying and configuring
routes."
::= { t11FcRouteGroups 1 }
END
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 16]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
7. Acknowledgements
This document was originally developed and approved by the INCITS
Task Group T11.5 (http://www.t11.org) as the SM-RTM project. We wish
to acknowledge the contributions and comments from the INCITS
Technical Committee T11, including the following:
T11 Chair: Robert Snively, Brocade
T11 Vice Chair: Claudio DeSanti, Cisco Systems
T11.5 Chair: Roger Cummings, Symantec
T11.5 members, especially:
Ken Hirata, Emulex
Scott Kipp, McData
Elizabeth G. Rodriguez, Dot Hill
The document was subsequently approved by the IETF's IMSS Working
Group, chaired by David Black (EMC Corporation). We also wish to
acknowledge Bert Wijnen (Lucent Technologies), the IETF Area
Director, for his review of the document.
8. IANA Considerations
The IANA has assigned a MIB OID for the T11-FC-ROUTE-MIB module under
the appropriate subtree.
9. Security Considerations
There are several 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 objects and their
sensitivity/vulnerability are:
t11FcRouteDomainId, t11FcRouteMetric, t11FcRouteType,
t11FcRouteIfDown, t11FcRouteRowStatus
-- configure new routes and/or modify existing routes.
Such objects may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some
network environments. For example, the ability to change network
topology or network speed may afford an attacker the ability to
obtain better performance at the expense of other network users. The
support for SET operations in a non-secure environment without proper
protection can have a negative effect on network operations.
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 17]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
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. The objects and their
sensitivity/vulnerability are: the write-able objects listed above
plus one other:
t11FcRouteLastChangeTime
-- the time of the last routing table change.
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 implementors 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.
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 18]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
10. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case,
J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Structure of
Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC
2578, April 1999.
[RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case,
J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Textual Conventions
for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999.
[RFC2580] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case,
J., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser, "Conformance
Statements for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, April 1999.
[RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group
MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000.
[RFC3411] Harrington, D., Presuhn, R., and B. Wijnen, "An
Architecture for Describing Simple Network Management
Protocol (SNMP) Management Frameworks", STD 62, RFC
3411, December 2002.
[RFC4439] DeSanti, C., Gaonkar, V., McCloghrie, K., and S. Gai,
"Fibre Channel Fabric Address Manager MIB", RFC 4439,
March 2006.
[RFC4626] DeSanti, C., Gaonkar, V., McCloghrie, K., and S. Gai,
"MIB for Fibre Channel's Fabric Shortest Path First
(FSPF) Protocol", RFC 4626, September 2006.
[FC-FS] "Fibre Channel - Framing and Signaling (FC-FS)", ANSI
INCITS 373-2003, April 2003.
[FC-SW-3] "Fibre Channel - Switch Fabric - 3 (FC-SW-3)", ANSI
INCITS 384-2004, 2004.
[FC-SW-4] "Fibre Channel - Switch Fabric - 4 (FC-SW-4)", ANSI
INCITS 418-2006, 2006.
[FC-MGMT] McCloghrie, K., "Fibre Channel Management MIB", RFC
4044, May 2005.
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 19]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
11. Informative References
[RFC2096] Baker, F., "IP Forwarding Table MIB", RFC 2096, January
1997.
[RFC2741] Daniele, M., Wijnen, B., Ellison, M., and D. Francisco,
"Agent Extensibility (AgentX) Protocol Version 1", RFC
2741, January 2000.
[RFC2837] Teow, K., "Definitions of Managed Objects for the
Fabric Element in Fibre Channel Standard", RFC 2837,
May 2000.
[RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart,
"Introduction and Applicability Statements for
Internet-Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410,
December 2002.
[RFC4292] Haberman, B., "IP Forwarding Table MIB", RFC 4292,
April 2006.
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 20]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
Authors' Addresses
Claudio DeSanti
Cisco Systems, Inc.
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134 USA
Phone: +1 408 853-9172
EMail: cds@cisco.com
Srini Kode
Consultant
Phone: 408-348-5343
EMail: srinikode@yahoo.com
Keith McCloghrie
Cisco Systems, Inc.
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA USA 95134
Phone: +1 408-526-5260
EMail: kzm@cisco.com
Silvano Gai
Retired
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 21]
RFC 4625 FC Routing Information MIB September 2006
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).
DeSanti, et al. Standards Track [Page 22]
ERRATA
