doc: Add RFC documents

1 files changed, 1123 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc8502.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc8502.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1bdc15a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc8502.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,1123 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                          Z. Zhang
+Request for Comments: 8502                        Juniper Networks, Inc.
+Category: Standards Track                                     H. Tsunoda
+ISSN: 2070-1721                           Tohoku Institute of Technology
+                                                           December 2018
+
+
+                         L2L3 VPN Multicast MIB
+
+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 two MIB modules that will be used by
+   other MIB modules for monitoring and/or configuring Layer 2 and Layer
+   3 Virtual Private Networks that support multicast.
+
+Status of This Memo
+
+   This is an Internet Standards Track document.
+
+   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
+   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
+   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
+   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
+   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
+
+   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
+   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
+   https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8502.
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+   Copyright (c) 2018 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
+   (https://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.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                    [Page 1]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+Table of Contents
+
+   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
+     1.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
+   2.  The Internet-Standard Management Framework  . . . . . . . . .   4
+   3.  Summary of MIB Modules  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
+   4.  Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
+     4.1.  L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-TC-MIB Object Definitions  . . . . . .   4
+     4.2.  L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-MIB Object Definitions . . . . . . . .   9
+   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
+   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
+   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
+     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
+     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
+   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
+   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
+
+1.  Introduction
+
+   In BGP/MPLS Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), the Border Gateway
+   Protocol (BGP) is used for distributing routes and Multiprotocol
+   Label Switching (MPLS) is used for forwarding packets across service
+   provider networks.
+
+   The procedures for supporting multicast in a BGP/MPLS Layer 3 (L3)
+   VPN are specified in [RFC6513].  The procedures for supporting
+   multicast in a BGP/MPLS Layer 2 (L2) VPN are specified in [RFC7117].
+   Throughout this document, we will use the term "L2L3VpnMCast network"
+   to mean a BGP/MPLS L2 and L3 VPN that supports multicast.
+
+   L2L3VpnMCast networks use various transport mechanisms for forwarding
+   a packet to all or a subset of Provider Edge (PE) routers across
+   service provider networks.  These transport mechanisms are abstracted
+   as provider tunnels (P-tunnels).  The type of P-tunnel indicates the
+   type of tunneling technology used to establish the P-tunnel.  The
+   syntax and semantics of a Tunnel Identifier are determined by the
+   corresponding P-tunnel type [RFC6514].  The P-tunnel type and
+   P-tunnel identifier together identify a P-tunnel.
+
+   A BGP attribute that specifies information of a P-tunnel is called a
+   Provider Multicast Service Interface (PMSI) Tunnel attribute.  The
+   PMSI Tunnel attribute is advertised/received by PEs in BGP auto-
+   discovery (A-D) routes.  [RFC6514] defines the format of a PMSI
+   Tunnel attribute.  The P-tunnel type and the P-tunnel identifier are
+   included in the corresponding PMSI Tunnel attribute.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                    [Page 2]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+   This document describes textual conventions (TCs) and common managed
+   objects (MOs) that will be used by other Management Information Base
+   (MIB) modules for monitoring and/or configuring L2L3VpnMCast
+   networks.
+
+   This document defines two TCs to represent
+
+   (a) the type of a P-tunnel and
+   (b) the identifier of a P-tunnel
+
+   The document also defines MOs that will provide the information
+   contained in a PMSI Tunnel attribute and corresponding P-tunnel.
+
+1.1.  Terminology
+
+   This document adopts the definitions, acronyms, and mechanisms
+   described in [RFC6513] [RFC6514] [RFC7117] and other documents that
+   they refer to.  Familiarity with multicast, MPLS, Layer 3 VPN, and
+   Multicast VPN concepts and/or mechanisms is assumed.  Some terms
+   specifically related to this document are explained below.
+
+   PMSI [RFC6513] is a conceptual interface instantiated by a P-tunnel,
+   which is a transport mechanism used to deliver multicast traffic.  A
+   PE uses it to send customer multicast traffic to all or some PEs in
+   the same VPN.
+
+   There are two kinds of PMSIs: Inclusive PMSI (I-PMSI) and Selective
+   PMSI (S-PMSI) [RFC6513].  An I-PMSI is a PMSI that enables a PE
+   attached to a particular Multicast VPN to transmit a message to all
+   PEs in the same VPN.  An S-PMSI is a PMSI that enables a PE attached
+   to a particular Multicast VPN to transmit a message to some of the
+   PEs in the same VPN.
+
+   Throughout this document, we will use the term "PMSI" to refer to
+   both "I-PMSI" and "S-PMSI".
+
+   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
+   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
+   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
+   BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
+   capitals, as shown here.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                    [Page 3]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+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.  Summary of MIB Modules
+
+   This document defines two MIB modules: L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-TC-MIB and
+   L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-MIB.
+
+   o  L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-TC-MIB contains two textual conventions:
+      L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelType and L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId.
+      L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelType provides an enumeration of the
+      P-tunnel types.  L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId represents an
+      identifier of a P-tunnel.
+
+   o  L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-MIB defines the following table:
+      l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeTable.  An entry in this table
+      corresponds to the attribute information of a specific P-tunnel on
+      a PE router.  Entries in this table will be used by other MIB
+      modules for monitoring and/or configuring an L2L3VpnMCast network.
+      The table index uniquely identifies a P-tunnel.  It is composed of
+      a type and identifier of a P-tunnel.  The table may also be used
+      in conjunction with other MIBs, such as the MPLS Traffic
+      Engineering MIB (MPLS-TE-STD-MIB) [RFC3812], to obtain further
+      information about a P-tunnel.  It may also be used in conjunction
+      with the Interfaces Group MIB (IF-MIB) [RFC2863] to obtain further
+      information about the interface corresponding to a P-tunnel.
+
+4.  Definitions
+
+4.1.  L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-TC-MIB Object Definitions
+
+   This MIB module makes reference to the following documents:
+   [RFC4875], [RFC5015], [RFC6388], [RFC7524], and [RFC7761].
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                    [Page 4]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+    L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-TC-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN
+
+    IMPORTS
+      MODULE-IDENTITY, mib-2
+         FROM SNMPv2-SMI                            -- RFC 2578
+
+      TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
+         FROM SNMPv2-TC;                            -- RFC 2579
+
+    l2L3VpnMcastTCMIB MODULE-IDENTITY
+      LAST-UPDATED "201812140000Z"  -- 14 December 2018
+      ORGANIZATION "IETF BESS Working Group"
+      CONTACT-INFO
+                    "Zhaohui Zhang
+                     Juniper Networks, Inc.
+                     10 Technology Park Drive
+                     Westford, MA 01886
+                     United States of America
+                     Email: zzhang@juniper.net
+
+                     Hiroshi Tsunoda
+                     Tohoku Institute of Technology
+                     35-1, Yagiyama Kasumi-cho
+                     Taihaku-ku, Sendai, 982-8577
+                     Japan
+                     Email: tsuno@m.ieice.org"
+
+      DESCRIPTION
+          "This MIB module specifies textual conventions for
+           Border Gateway Protocol/Multiprotocol Label
+           Switching Layer 2 and Layer 3 Virtual Private Networks
+           that support multicast (L2L3VpnMCast networks).
+
+           Copyright (c) 2018 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, is permitted pursuant to, and subject
+           to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD
+           License set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal
+           Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
+           (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
+          "
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                    [Page 5]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+      -- Revision History
+
+      REVISION "201812140000Z"  -- 14 December 2018
+      DESCRIPTION
+          "Initial version, published as RFC 8502."
+
+      ::= { mib-2 244 }
+
+    -- Textual Convention
+
+    L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
+      STATUS       current
+      DESCRIPTION
+          "This textual convention enumerates values
+           representing the type of a provider tunnel (P-tunnel)
+           used for L2L3VpnMCast networks.
+           These labeled numbers are aligned with the definition
+           of Tunnel Types in Section 5 of RFC 6514 and
+           Section 14.1 of RFC 7524.
+
+           The enumerated values and the corresponding P-tunnel types
+           are as follows:
+
+            noTunnelInfo       (0) : No tunnel information RFC 6514
+            rsvpP2mp           (1) : RSVP-TE P2MP LSP      RFC 4875
+            ldpP2mp            (2) : mLDP P2MP LSP         RFC 6388
+            pimSsm             (3) : PIM-SSM Tree          RFC 7761
+            pimAsm             (4) : PIM-SM Tree           RFC 7761
+            pimBidir           (5) : BIDIR-PIM Tree        RFC 5015
+            ingressReplication (6) : Ingress Replication   RFC 6513
+            ldpMp2mp           (7) : mLDP MP2MP LSP        RFC 6388
+            transportTunnel    (8) : Transport Tunnel      RFC 7524
+
+           These numbers are registered at IANA.
+           A current list of assignments can be found at
+           <https://www.iana.org/assignments/bgp-parameters/>.
+          "
+      REFERENCE
+          "RFC 4875
+           RFC 5015
+           RFC 6388
+           RFC 6513
+           RFC 6514, Section 5
+           RFC 7524, Section 14.1
+           RFC 7761
+          "
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                    [Page 6]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+      SYNTAX       INTEGER
+           {
+             noTunnelInfo       (0),
+             rsvpP2mp           (1),
+             ldpP2mp            (2),
+             pimSsm             (3),
+             pimAsm             (4),
+             pimBidir           (5),
+             ingressReplication (6),
+             ldpMp2mp           (7),
+             transportTunnel    (8)
+           }
+
+    L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
+      STATUS       current
+      DESCRIPTION
+          "This textual convention represents the Tunnel Identifier
+           of a P-tunnel.
+
+           The size of the identifier depends on the address family
+           (IPv4 or IPv6) and the value of the corresponding
+           L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelType object.
+
+           The corresponding L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelType object
+           represents the type of tunneling technology used
+           to establish the P-tunnel.
+
+           The size of the identifier for each tunneling technology
+           is summarized below.
+
+            L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelType            Size (in octets)
+             (tunneling technology)                      IPv4  IPv6
+           -----------------------------------------------------------
+             noTunnelInfo       (No tunnel information)    0     0
+             rsvpP2mp           (RSVP-TE P2MP LSP)        12    24
+             ldpP2mp            (mLDP P2MP LSP)           17    29
+             pimSsm             (PIM-SSM Tree)             8    32
+             pimAsm             (PIM-SM Tree)              8    32
+             pimBidir           (BIDIR-PIM Tree)           8    32
+             ingressReplication (Ingress Replication)      4    16
+             ldpMp2mp           (mLDP MP2MP LSP)          17    29
+             transportTunnel    (Transport Tunnel)         8    32
+
+           The Tunnel Type is set to 'No tunnel information'
+           when the PMSI Tunnel attribute carries no tunnel
+           information (there is no Tunnel Identifier).
+           The value of the corresponding L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId
+           object will be a string of length zero.
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                    [Page 7]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+           For Tunnel Type rsvpP2mp(1), the corresponding Tunnel
+           Identifier is composed of an Extended Tunnel ID (4 octets in
+           IPv4, 16 octets in IPv6), 2 unused (Reserved) octets that of
+           value zero, a Tunnel ID (2 octets), and a Point-to-Multipoint
+           (P2MP) ID (4 octets).  The size of the corresponding
+           L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId object will be 12 octets in IPv4
+           and 24 octets in IPv6.
+
+           For Tunnel Type ldpP2mp(2), the corresponding Tunnel
+           Identifier is the P2MP Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC)
+           Element (RFC 6388).  The size of the corresponding
+           L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId object will be 17 octets
+           in IPv4 and 29 octets in IPv6.
+
+           For Tunnel Types pimSsm(3), PimAsm(4), and PimBidir(5), the
+           corresponding Tunnel Identifier is composed of the source IP
+           address and the group IP address.
+           The size of the corresponding L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId
+           object will be 8 octets in IPv4 and 32 octets in IPv6.
+
+           For Tunnel Type ingressReplication(6), the Tunnel Identifier
+           is the unicast tunnel endpoint IP address of the local PE.
+           The size of the corresponding L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId
+           object will be 4 octets in IPv4 and 16 octets in IPv6.
+
+           For Tunnel Type ldpMp2mp(7), the Tunnel Identifier is
+           a Multipoint-to-Multipoint (MP2MP) FEC Element (RFC 6388).
+           The size of the corresponding L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId
+           object will be 17 octets in IPv4 and 29 octets in IPv6.
+
+           For Tunnel Type transportTunnel(8), the Tunnel Identifier
+           is a tuple of Source PE Address and Local Number,
+           which is a number that is unique to the Source PE (RFC 7524).
+           Both Source PE Address and Local Number are 4 octets in IPv4
+           and 16 octets in IPv6.
+           The size of the corresponding L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId
+           object will be 8 octets in IPv4 and 32 octets in IPv6.
+          "
+      REFERENCE
+          "RFC 6514, Section 5
+           RFC 4875, Section 19.1
+           RFC 6388, Sections 2.2 and 3.2
+           RFC 7524, Section 14.1
+          "
+      SYNTAX       OCTET STRING ( SIZE (0|4|8|12|16|17|24|29|32) )
+
+    END
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                    [Page 8]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+4.2.  L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-MIB Object Definitions
+
+   This MIB module makes reference to the following documents:
+   [RFC3811].
+
+  L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN
+
+  IMPORTS
+    MODULE-IDENTITY, OBJECT-TYPE, mib-2, zeroDotZero
+       FROM SNMPv2-SMI                            -- RFC 2578
+
+    MODULE-COMPLIANCE, OBJECT-GROUP
+       FROM SNMPv2-CONF                           -- RFC 2580
+
+    RowPointer
+       FROM SNMPv2-TC                             -- RFC 2579
+
+    MplsLabel
+       FROM MPLS-TC-STD-MIB                       -- RFC 3811
+
+    L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelType,
+    L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId
+       FROM L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-TC-MIB;            -- RFC 8502
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastMIB MODULE-IDENTITY
+    LAST-UPDATED "201812140000Z"  -- 14 December 2018
+    ORGANIZATION "IETF BESS Working Group"
+    CONTACT-INFO
+                  "Zhaohui Zhang
+                   Juniper Networks, Inc.
+                   10 Technology Park Drive
+                   Westford, MA 01886
+                   United States of America
+                   Email: zzhang@juniper.net
+
+                   Hiroshi Tsunoda
+                   Tohoku Institute of Technology
+                   35-1, Yagiyama Kasumi-cho
+                   Taihaku-ku, Sendai, 982-8577
+                   Japan
+                   Email: tsuno@m.ieice.org"
+
+    DESCRIPTION
+        "This MIB module defines a table representing the attribute
+         information of the provider tunnels (P-tunnels) on a PE router.
+         This MIB module will be used by other MIB modules designed for
+         monitoring and/or configuring Border Gateway
+         Protocol/Multiprotocol Label Switching
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                    [Page 9]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+         Layer 2 and Layer 3 Virtual Private
+         Network that support multicast (L2L3VpnMCast network).
+
+         Copyright (c) 2018 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, is permitted pursuant to, and subject
+         to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License
+         set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions
+         Relating to IETF Documents
+         (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
+        "
+
+    -- Revision History
+
+    REVISION "201812140000Z"  -- 14 December 2018
+    DESCRIPTION
+        "Initial version, published as RFC 8502."
+
+    ::= { mib-2 245 }
+
+  -- Top-level components of this MIB.
+  l2L3VpnMcastStates      OBJECT IDENTIFIER
+                          ::= { l2L3VpnMcastMIB 1 }
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastConformance OBJECT IDENTIFIER
+                          ::= { l2L3VpnMcastMIB 2 }
+
+  -- Tables, Scalars, Conformance Information
+  -- Table of PMSI Tunnel Attributes
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeTable OBJECT-TYPE
+     SYNTAX        SEQUENCE OF L2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeEntry
+     MAX-ACCESS    not-accessible
+     STATUS        current
+     DESCRIPTION
+         "An entry in this table corresponds to
+          the attribute information of a specific
+          P-tunnel on a PE router.
+          A part of the attributes corresponds to fields in
+          a Provider Multicast Service Interface (PMSI) Tunnel
+          attribute advertised and received by a PE router.
+          The entries will be referred to by other MIB modules
+          for monitoring and/or configuring L2L3VpnMCast networks.
+         "
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                   [Page 10]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+     REFERENCE
+         "RFC 6514, Section 5"
+     ::= { l2L3VpnMcastStates 1 }
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeEntry OBJECT-TYPE
+     SYNTAX        L2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeEntry
+     MAX-ACCESS    not-accessible
+     STATUS        current
+     DESCRIPTION
+         "A conceptual row corresponding to a specific
+          P-tunnel on this router.
+         "
+     REFERENCE
+         "RFC 6514, Section 5"
+     INDEX {
+             l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeType,
+             l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeId
+           }
+     ::= { l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeTable 1 }
+
+  L2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeEntry ::=
+      SEQUENCE {
+          l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeType
+              L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelType,
+          l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeId
+              L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId,
+          l2L3VpnMCastPmsiTunnelLeafInfoRequired
+              INTEGER,
+          l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeMplsLabel
+              MplsLabel,
+          l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelPointer
+              RowPointer,
+          l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelIf
+              RowPointer
+      }
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeType OBJECT-TYPE
+     SYNTAX        L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelType
+     MAX-ACCESS    not-accessible
+     STATUS        current
+     DESCRIPTION
+         "This object indicates the type of tunneling technology
+          used to establish the P-tunnel corresponding to this entry.
+
+          When BGP-based PMSI signaling is used, the value of
+          this object corresponds to the Tunnel Type field
+          in the PMSI Tunnel attribute advertised/received
+          in a PMSI auto-discovery (A-D) route.
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                   [Page 11]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+         "
+     REFERENCE
+         "RFC 6514, Section 5"
+     ::= { l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeEntry 1 }
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeId OBJECT-TYPE
+     SYNTAX        L2L3VpnMcastProviderTunnelId
+     MAX-ACCESS    not-accessible
+     STATUS        current
+     DESCRIPTION
+         "This object represents the Tunnel Identifier field, which
+          uniquely identifies a P-tunnel, in the PMSI Tunnel attribute
+          of the P-tunnel corresponding to this entry.
+
+          The size of the identifier depends on the address family
+          (IPv4 or IPv6) and the value of the corresponding
+          l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeType object, i.e., the type of
+          tunneling technology used to establish the P-tunnel.
+         "
+     REFERENCE
+         "RFC 6514, Section 5"
+     ::= { l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeEntry 2 }
+
+
+  l2L3VpnMCastPmsiTunnelLeafInfoRequired OBJECT-TYPE
+     SYNTAX        INTEGER {
+                       false        (0),
+                       true         (1),
+                       notAvailable (2)
+                   }
+     MAX-ACCESS    read-only
+     STATUS        current
+     DESCRIPTION
+         "When the value of this object is set to 1 (true),
+          it indicates that the PE that originated the
+          PMSI Tunnel attribute of the P-tunnel corresponding
+          to this entry requests receivers to originate
+          a new Leaf A-D route.
+
+          A value of zero (false) indicates that there is no such
+          request.
+
+          When the P-tunnel does not have a corresponding PMSI
+          Tunnel attribute, the value of this object will be
+          2 (notAvailable).
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                   [Page 12]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+          In the case of multicast in MPLS/BGP IP VPNs,
+          this object represents the 'Leaf Information Required flag'
+          (RFC 6514) in the Flags field in the PMSI Tunnel attribute
+          of the P-tunnel corresponding to this entry.
+         "
+     REFERENCE
+         "RFC 6514, Section 5
+         "
+     ::= { l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeEntry 3 }
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeMplsLabel OBJECT-TYPE
+     SYNTAX        MplsLabel
+     MAX-ACCESS    read-only
+     STATUS        current
+     DESCRIPTION
+         "This object represents the MPLS Label in the PMSI Tunnel
+          attribute of the P-tunnel corresponding to this entry.
+
+          When BGP-based PMSI signaling is used, the PMSI Tunnel
+          attribute of the P-tunnel will be advertised/received
+          in a PMSI A-D route.  The value of
+          this object corresponds to the MPLS Label in the attribute.
+
+          When the P-tunnel does not have a PMSI tunnel
+          attribute, the value of this object will be zero.
+         "
+     REFERENCE
+         "RFC 6514, Section 5"
+     ::= { l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeEntry 4 }
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelPointer OBJECT-TYPE
+     SYNTAX        RowPointer
+     MAX-ACCESS    read-only
+     STATUS        current
+     DESCRIPTION
+         "Details of a P-tunnel identified by
+          l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeId may be present
+          in some other table, e.g.,
+          mplsTunnelTable (RFC 3812).  This object specifies
+          the pointer to the row that pertains to the entry
+          in the table.
+
+          If no such entry exists, the value of this object
+          will be zeroDotZero.
+         "
+     REFERENCE
+         "RFC 3812, Sections 6.1 and 11"
+     DEFVAL        { zeroDotZero }
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                   [Page 13]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+     ::= { l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeEntry 5 }
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelIf OBJECT-TYPE
+     SYNTAX        RowPointer
+     MAX-ACCESS    read-only
+     STATUS        current
+     DESCRIPTION
+         "If the P-tunnel identified by
+          l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeId has a corresponding
+          entry in ifXTable (RFC 2863), this object will
+          point to the row in ifXTable that pertains to the entry.
+          Otherwise, the value of this object will be zeroDotZero.
+         "
+     REFERENCE
+         "RFC 2863, Section 6"
+     DEFVAL        { zeroDotZero }
+     ::= { l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeEntry 6 }
+
+  -- Conformance Information
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastCompliances OBJECT IDENTIFIER
+                          ::= { l2L3VpnMcastConformance 1 }
+  l2L3VpnMcastGroups      OBJECT IDENTIFIER
+                          ::= { l2L3VpnMcastConformance 2 }
+
+  -- Compliance Statements
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastCoreCompliance MODULE-COMPLIANCE
+      STATUS  current
+      DESCRIPTION
+         "The core compliance statement for SNMP entities
+          that implement the L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-MIB module.
+         "
+      MODULE  -- this module
+
+      MANDATORY-GROUPS {
+           l2L3VpnMcastCoreGroup
+      }
+      ::= { l2L3VpnMcastCompliances 1 }
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastFullCompliance MODULE-COMPLIANCE
+      STATUS  current
+      DESCRIPTION
+         "The full compliance statement for SNMP entities
+          that implement the L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-MIB module.
+         "
+      MODULE  -- this module
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                   [Page 14]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+      MANDATORY-GROUPS {
+           l2L3VpnMcastCoreGroup,
+           l2L3VpnMcastOptionalGroup
+      }
+      ::= { l2L3VpnMcastCompliances 2 }
+
+  -- Units of Conformance
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastCoreGroup    OBJECT-GROUP
+      OBJECTS {
+          l2L3VpnMCastPmsiTunnelLeafInfoRequired,
+          l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeMplsLabel
+      }
+      STATUS      current
+      DESCRIPTION
+          "Support of these objects is required.
+          "
+      ::= { l2L3VpnMcastGroups 1 }
+
+  l2L3VpnMcastOptionalGroup    OBJECT-GROUP
+      OBJECTS {
+          l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelPointer,
+          l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelIf
+      }
+      STATUS      current
+      DESCRIPTION
+          "Support of these objects is optional.
+          "
+      ::= { l2L3VpnMcastGroups 2 }
+
+  END
+
+5.  Security Considerations
+
+   There are no management objects defined in these MIB modules 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 objects in these MIB modules may be considered sensitive
+   or vulnerable in some network environments.  This includes INDEX
+   objects with a MAX-ACCESS of not-accessible, and any indices from
+   other modules exposed via AUGMENTS.  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:
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                   [Page 15]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+   o  the l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeTable collectively shows the
+      P-tunnel network topology and its performance characteristics.
+      For instance, l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelAttributeId in this table will
+      contain the identifier that uniquely identifies a P-tunnel.  This
+      identifier may be composed of source and multicast group IP
+      addresses.  l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelPointer and
+      l2L3VpnMcastPmsiTunnelIf will point to the corresponding entries
+      in other tables containing configuration and/or performance
+      information of a P-tunnel and its interface.  If an Administrator
+      does not want to reveal this information, then these objects
+      should be considered sensitive/vulnerable.
+
+   SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 did not include adequate security.
+   Even if the network itself is secure (for example by using IPsec),
+   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.
+
+   Implementations SHOULD provide the security features described by the
+   SNMPv3 framework (see [RFC3410]), and implementations claiming
+   compliance to the SNMPv3 standard MUST include full support for
+   authentication and privacy via the User-based Security Model (USM)
+   [RFC3414] with the AES cipher algorithm [RFC3826].  Implementations
+   MAY also provide support for the Transport Security Model (TSM)
+   [RFC5591] in combination with a secure transport such as SSH
+   [RFC5592] or TLS/DTLS [RFC6353].
+
+   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.
+
+6.  IANA Considerations
+
+   The MIB module in this document uses the following IANA-assigned
+   OBJECT IDENTIFIER values recorded in the "SMI Network Management MGMT
+   Codes Internet-standard MIB" registry:
+
+  Name                Description                OBJECT-IDENTIFIER value
+  -----------------  --------------------------  ----------------------
+  l2L3VpnMcastTCMIB   L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-TC-MIB  { mib-2 244 }
+  l2L3VpnMcastMIB     L2L3-VPN-MULTICAST-MIB     { mib-2 245 }
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                   [Page 16]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+7.  References
+
+7.1.  Normative References
+
+   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
+              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
+
+   [RFC2578]  McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and
+              J. Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Structure of Management
+              Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC2578, April 1999,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2578>.
+
+   [RFC2579]  McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and
+              J. Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Textual Conventions for SMIv2",
+              STD 58, RFC 2579, DOI 10.17487/RFC2579, April 1999,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2579>.
+
+   [RFC2580]  McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and
+              J. Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Conformance Statements for SMIv2",
+              STD 58, RFC 2580, DOI 10.17487/RFC2580, April 1999,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2580>.
+
+   [RFC2863]  McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group
+              MIB", RFC 2863, DOI 10.17487/RFC2863, June 2000,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2863>.
+
+   [RFC3414]  Blumenthal, U. and B. Wijnen, "User-based Security Model
+              (USM) for version 3 of the Simple Network Management
+              Protocol (SNMPv3)", STD 62, RFC 3414,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC3414, December 2002,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3414>.
+
+   [RFC3811]  Nadeau, T., Ed. and J. Cucchiara, Ed., "Definitions of
+              Textual Conventions (TCs) for Multiprotocol Label
+              Switching (MPLS) Management", RFC 3811,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC3811, June 2004,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3811>.
+
+   [RFC3812]  Srinivasan, C., Viswanathan, A., and T. Nadeau,
+              "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering
+              (TE) Management Information Base (MIB)", RFC 3812,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC3812, June 2004,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3812>.
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                   [Page 17]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+   [RFC3826]  Blumenthal, U., Maino, F., and K. McCloghrie, "The
+              Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) Cipher Algorithm in the
+              SNMP User-based Security Model", RFC 3826,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC3826, June 2004,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3826>.
+
+   [RFC4875]  Aggarwal, R., Ed., Papadimitriou, D., Ed., and
+              S. Yasukawa, Ed., "Extensions to Resource Reservation
+              Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) for Point-to-
+              Multipoint TE Label Switched Paths (LSPs)", RFC 4875,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC4875, May 2007,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4875>.
+
+   [RFC5015]  Handley, M., Kouvelas, I., Speakman, T., and L. Vicisano,
+              "Bidirectional Protocol Independent Multicast (BIDIR-
+              PIM)", RFC 5015, DOI 10.17487/RFC5015, October 2007,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5015>.
+
+   [RFC5591]  Harrington, D. and W. Hardaker, "Transport Security Model
+              for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)",
+              STD 78, RFC 5591, DOI 10.17487/RFC5591, June 2009,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5591>.
+
+   [RFC5592]  Harrington, D., Salowey, J., and W. Hardaker, "Secure
+              Shell Transport Model for the Simple Network Management
+              Protocol (SNMP)", RFC 5592, DOI 10.17487/RFC5592, June
+              2009, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5592>.
+
+   [RFC6353]  Hardaker, W., "Transport Layer Security (TLS) Transport
+              Model for the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)",
+              STD 78, RFC 6353, DOI 10.17487/RFC6353, July 2011,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6353>.
+
+   [RFC6388]  Wijnands, IJ., Ed., Minei, I., Ed., Kompella, K., and
+              B. Thomas, "Label Distribution Protocol Extensions for
+              Point- to-Multipoint and Multipoint-to-Multipoint Label
+              Switched Paths", RFC 6388, DOI 10.17487/RFC6388, November
+              2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6388>.
+
+   [RFC6513]  Rosen, E., Ed. and R. Aggarwal, Ed., "Multicast in MPLS/
+              BGP IP VPNs", RFC 6513, DOI 10.17487/RFC6513, February
+              2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6513>.
+
+   [RFC6514]  Aggarwal, R., Rosen, E., Morin, T., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP
+              Encodings and Procedures for Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP
+              VPNs", RFC 6514, DOI 10.17487/RFC6514, February 2012,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6514>.
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                   [Page 18]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+   [RFC7117]  Aggarwal, R., Ed., Kamite, Y., Fang, L., Rekhter, Y., and
+              C. Kodeboniya, "Multicast in Virtual Private LAN Service
+              (VPLS)", RFC 7117, DOI 10.17487/RFC7117, February 2014,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7117>.
+
+   [RFC7524]  Rekhter, Y., Rosen, E., Aggarwal, R., Morin, T.,
+              Grosclaude, I., Leymann, N., and S. Saad, "Inter-Area
+              Point-to-Multipoint (P2MP) Segmented Label Switched Paths
+              (LSPs)", RFC 7524, DOI 10.17487/RFC7524, May 2015,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7524>.
+
+   [RFC7761]  Fenner, B., Handley, M., Holbrook, H., Kouvelas, I.,
+              Parekh, R., Zhang, Z., and L. Zheng, "Protocol Independent
+              Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol Specification
+              (Revised)", STD 83, RFC 7761, DOI 10.17487/RFC7761, March
+              2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7761>.
+
+   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
+              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
+              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
+
+7.2.  Informative References
+
+   [RFC3410]  Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart,
+              "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet-
+              Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410,
+              DOI 10.17487/RFC3410, December 2002,
+              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3410>.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                   [Page 19]
+
+RFC 8502                   L2L3-VPN-MCAST MIB              December 2018
+
+
+Acknowledgements
+
+   Glenn Mansfield Keeni did the MIB Doctor review and provided valuable
+   comments.
+
+Authors' Addresses
+
+   Zhaohui (Jeffrey) Zhang
+   Juniper Networks, Inc.
+   10 Technology Park Drive
+   Westford, MA  01886
+   United States of America
+
+   Email: zzhang@juniper.net
+
+
+   Hiroshi Tsunoda
+   Tohoku Institute of Technology
+   35-1, Yagiyama Kasumi-cho
+   Taihaku-ku, Sendai  982-8577
+   Japan
+
+   Phone: +81-22-305-3411
+   Email: tsuno@m.ieice.org
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Zhang & Tsunoda              Standards Track                   [Page 20]
+