diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc3571.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc3571.txt | 1963 |
1 files changed, 1963 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc3571.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc3571.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..360d996 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc3571.txt @@ -0,0 +1,1963 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group D. Rawlins +Request for Comments: 3571 MCI +Category: Informational A. Kulkarni + Intel + K. Chan + Nortel Networks + M. Bokaemper + Juniper Networks + D. Dutt + Cisco + August 2003 + + + Framework Policy Information Base for Usage Feedback + +Status of this Memo + + This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does + not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this + memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved. + +Abstract + + This document describes a portion of the Policy Information Base + (PIB) to control policy usage collection and reporting in a device. + + The provisioning classes specified here allow a Policy Decision Point + (PDP) to select which policy objects should collect usage + information, what information should be collected and when it should + be reported. + + This PIB requires the presence of other PIBs (defined elsewhere) that + provide the policy objects from which usage information is collected. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 1] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 + 2. General Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 + 2.1. Selection, Usage and Linkage Policies. . . . . . . . . . 3 + 2.2. Normal Operations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 2.2.1. Connection Establishment and Initial + Configuration Request. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 + 2.2.2. Unsolicited Reports - Periodic Reporting . . . . 5 + 2.2.3. Unsolicited Reports - Reporting Conditions . . . 5 + 2.2.4. Solicited Reports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 2.2.5. Resuming and Suspending Periodic Feedback + Reporting. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 2.2.6. Failover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + 2.3. Usage Policy and Under-specified Selection Criteria. . . 7 + 3. Summary of the Feedback Framework Policy Information Base. . . 8 + 3.1. SPPI ACCESS Clause Report-Only . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 + 3.2. Usage32 and Usage64 Textual Conventions. . . . . . . . . 8 + 3.3. Feedback Groups and PRCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 3.3.1. Feedback Action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 + 3.3.2. Feedback Action List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 3.3.3. Feedback Linkage Capability. . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 3.3.4. Feedback Linkage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 3.3.5. Feedback Traffic Statistics Threshold. . . . . . 10 + 3.3.6. Feedback Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 + 3.3.7. Feedback Interface Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . 11 + 3.3.8. Feedback RoleCombo Filter Selection. . . . . . . 11 + 4. The Feedback Framework PIB Module. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 + 5. Security Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 + 6. IANA Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + 8.2. Informational References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 + 9. Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 + 10. Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 + +1. Introduction + + The Framework of Common Open Policy Service with Policy Provisioning + (COPS-PR) Usage Feedback describes the overall approach to policy + usage monitoring and reporting. This document defines the specific + Policy Information Base (PIB) framework for policy usage feedback. + The policy classes for monitoring and reporting policy usage + feedback, as well as policy classes for controlling reporting + intervals, suspension, resumption and solicitation are defined. + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 2] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + +Conventions Used in this Document + + 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]. + +2. General Concepts + +2.1. Selection, Usage and Linkage Policies + + There are three basic types of policies used to define what the PEP + is to monitor, record and report. These are the selection criteria + policy, the usage policy and the feedback report linkage policy. + + The selection criteria policy is installed by the PDP. It defines + the conditions used by the PEP to monitor and record a usage policy. + The selection criteria policy may only be used for defining usage + feedback selection criteria. However, a more general case is a + policy that already exists for policy enforcement that may also be + used for specifying feedback usage selection criteria. An example of + this is the frwkRoleCombo instance, which may be used in defining QoS + enforcement policies, but may also be used to specify conditions on + which to base usage - i.e. count the number of packets meeting the + criterion of an interface capability set name and role combination. + + The usage policy defines what attributes are recorded by the PEP. + These policies have an ACCESS clause of 'report-only'. Generally, + the usage policies specify counts related to a specific action such + as a packet being dropped. The feedback framework PIB defines two + usage policy classes, frwkFeedbackTraffic and frwkFeedbackIfTraffic. + Usage PRCs may be generic, collecting basic statistics, or they may + be specific to a particular usage. The PDP decides which PRC(s) best + suit(s) its requirements. The PEP may support only one usage + feedback PRC, in which case all statistics are gathered using + instances of that PRC. Alternatively, the PEP may support multiple + usage feedback PRCs. The PDP then decides which PRC to associate + with a particular selection criterion. + + A usage feedback policy and selection policy are tightly associated + with one another. A third policy, the frwkFeedbackLinkTable, is used + to associate, or provide a linkage for the selection and usage + policies. The frwkFeedbackLinkTable also specifies when to report + the usage feedback. The frwkFeedbackLinkTable entry permits the same + selection criteria instance to be re-used for various usage feedback + policies. The frwkFeedbackLinkTable contains the value of the + selection criteria instance as well as the value of the usage + feedback PRC. + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 3] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + ----------------- ------------------ ----------------- + | | | | | | + | Select Criteria | |Linkage Instance | |Usage Instance | + | | |-instance ID | |- instance ID | + | -instance ID |<--|-PRID of selection|--->|- PRID of Linkage| + | -conditions... | |-PRC of usage | |- counts... | + | | | | | | + ----------------- ------------------ ----------------- + + Figure 1 + + Figure 1 illustrates the relationship between the selection criteria, + linkage and usage policies. + + The PDP is not aware of the instance identifier of the usage feedback + policy when installing the selection criteria and feedback linkage + policies. The usage feedback policy is instantiated on the PEP by + the installation of a feedback report linkage and the PEP designates + the instance identifier. The usage feedback policy class always + contains an attribute of type ReferenceId that contains the instance + value of the associated frwkFeedbackLinkTable instance installed by + the PDP. An example of this is the attribute + frwkFeedbackTrafficLinkRef. + +2.2. Normal Operations + +2.2.1. Connection Establishment and Initial Configuration Request + + The Accounting Timer object in the COPS Connection Accept message + contains the minimum number of seconds between reporting intervals as + described in [COPS] and [FEEDBACKFWK]. This is used as the basic + unit of measurement in defining intervals for specific usage policies + with the frwkFeedbackLinkInterval attribute. + + The PEP notifies the PDP of the selection criteria policy classes and + usage policy classes it supports during the initial request for + configuration data using frwkPRCSupport instances [FR-PIB]. The PEP + also indicates whether it supports the frwkFeedbackLinkTable as well. + + The PDP responds to the initial request for configuration with a + DECISION that installs policies. The PDP may also specify maximum + reporting intervals associated with each of the usage policies. This + is done with the frwkFeedbackLinkInterval attribute in the + frwkFeedbackLink class. It may also specify reporting thresholds by + including an instance of a threshold class (e.g. + frwkFeedbackTrafficThreshold) in the decision. The PEP monitors and + records the usage per the conditions defined by its associated + selection criteria policy. Periodically the PEP reports the usage + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 4] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + with a REPORT message or provides a REPORT when solicited by the PDP. + The PDP solicits usage feedback with the frwkFeedbackActionIndicator + attribute of the frwkFeedbackAction class. + +2.2.2. Unsolicited Reports - Periodic Reporting + + Reporting may be periodic in nature and unsolicited. The intervals + at which the unsolicited reports are provided by the PEP are defined + in the specific Linkage policies. The defined intervals are based on + the number of seconds specified by the PDP in the ACCT Timer value. + The PDP may specify that the associated usage instance be included in + a periodic unsolicited report only if the threshold is reached and/or + if the usage value has changed from the previous reporting interval. + + There are cases when the PEP must supply unsolicited feedback reports + that may not fall on an interval boundary. The PEP MUST provide an + unsolicited REPORT containing all defined usage instances just prior + to the PEP issuing a Delete Request State and just prior to the PEP + de-activating a PIB instance context. + +2.2.3. Unsolicited Reports - Reporting Conditions + + Periodic unsolicited reports for individual usage feedback instances + can be suppressed by specifying additional conditions in the + frwkFeedbackLink instances. Supported conditions are: + + ChangeOnly + If this flag is set in the frwkFeedbackLinkFlags attribute, the + associated usage instance is only included in a periodic + unsolicited report if its value changed since the last unsolicited + report. + + Threshold + If this flag is set in the frwkFeedbackLinkFlags attribute, the + associated usage instance is only included in a periodic + unsolicited report if the threshold condition referenced in the + frwkLinkThreshold field evaluates successfully for the associated + usage instance. + + Both conditions can be combined in one frwkFeedbackLinkUsage object. + In this case, both conditions need to succeed for the usage instance + to be reported. + + Unsolicited reports triggered by a Delete Request State or the + deactivation of a PIB instance are not subject to these conditions - + all usage objects must be included in these cases. + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 5] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + +2.2.4. Solicited Reports + + The PDP may solicit policy usage feedback by issuing an unsolicited + Decision containing the frwkFeedbackActionIndicator set to + `solicitReport'. The PEP is to provide a solicited REPORT feedback + containing usage feedback. The PEP shall continue to provide + periodic feedback at the specified intervals established at client + connection acceptance. + + The reporting conditions (ChangeOnly and Threshold) do not affect + solicited reports - all requested usage instances must be included. + +2.2.5. Resuming and Suspending Periodic Feedback Reporting + + The PDP may suspend usage monitoring and tracking at the PEP with the + frwkFeedbackActionIndicator set to 'suspendMonitoringAndReports'. + The PEP must stop tracking usage information and must not issue any + feedback reports. The PDP may only suspend feedback reporting by + setting the ActionIndicator to 'suspendReports'. The PEP must cease + sending unsolicited reports but is to continue monitoring and + tracking usage. The PDP may resume the sending of feedback reports + and may resume usage monitoring by setting the ActionIndicator to + 'resume'. + + The PDP may suspend or resume all usage instances or the PDP may + specify one or more instances that are to be suspended or resumed. + The frwkFeedbackActionList attribute contains a tag identifier that + references a list of one or more frwkFeedbackActionList instances. + + The PDP may halt usage monitoring, tracking and reporting of usage + policies by removing the associated Linkage entry. + +2.2.6. Failover + + In the event that the connection is lost between the PEP and PDP, the + PEP continues to track usage information as long as it continues to + operate with the installed policy. When the locally installed policy + at the PEP expires, the usage policy data also expires. + + Upon successful reconnection where the PEP is still caching policy, + the PDP indicates to the PEP that the PEP may resume sending of the + COPS accounting type report messages. The PDP does this by issuing + an unsolicited decision containing the frwkFeedbackResumeIndicator + set to 'resume'. The PEP should resume reporting at the next + appropriate feedback interval established upon the acceptance of the + re-connection. The PDP is aware of the request state Handle(s) and + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 6] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + the supported PRCs either through the state synchronization mechanism + or because the PDP considers itself synchronized with the PEP upon + reconnection. + +2.3. Usage Policy and Under-specified Selection Criteria + + Some of the usage policy objects created in the PEP with COPS-PR can + be used by the PEP multiple times - they effectively act as templates + for the objects created by the PEP. COPS-PR only has the identity + (OID) of the object that is shared between all the assignments the + PEP created. However it is desirable to collect usage information + for each of the derived objects individually. + + This capability is achieved in the feedback framework PIB by + distributing additional information to qualify a specific assignment + of an object between the selection criteria PRC and the feedback + usage PRC. + + A selection criteria PRC that refers to a shared object, but contains + no qualifying information, selects all of the object's assignments. + Such a selection criteria PRC SHOULD be combined with a feedback + usage PRC that includes all the necessary information to identify a + specific assignment - a single selection criteria policy can then + result in the generation of many feedback usage objects, one for each + derived object. + + If the selection criteria PRC contains all the required qualifying + attributes for a specific assignment, it is combined with a feedback + usage PRC that only contains the desired metrics but no additional + attributes. + + Example: + + A frwkRoleCombo instance may be used as a selection criteria, + identifying a set of interfaces through their role combination and + capability set. If it is desired to get per-interface traffic + statistics, the usage PRC has to include an additional attribute + to qualify the specific interface. + + This could be achieved by linking the frwkFeedbackIfTraffic class + with a frwkRoleCombo instance in a frwkFeedbackLink instance. + Multiple frwkFeedbackIfTraffic instances will be created by the + PEP, one for each interface selected by the frwkRoleCombo + instance. The frwkFeedbackIfTraffic class contains the + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficIfIndex attribute that allows the PDP to + identify each interface's individual counters when the PEP reports + the frwkFeedbackIfTraffic instances. + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 7] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + If traffic usage collection is only desired for an individual + interface, a selection criteria should be used that qualifies the + interface completely, for example a frwkIfRoleCombo instance. In + this case, it can be linked to the usage class that has no + additional qualifying attributes, frwkFeedbackTraffic. + +3. Summary of the Feedback Framework Policy Information Base + +3.1. SPPI ACCESS Clause Report-Only + + The selection criteria and linkage policy classes follow the + definitions specified by [SPPI]. This structure specifies well- + defined policy classes and their instances residing in a common, + virtual repository [FR-PIB]. The additional PIB-ACCESS clause + attribute of "report-only" denotes the usage policy class reported by + the PEP. + +3.2. Usage32 and Usage64 Textual Conventions + + The SPPI does not support the Counter32/64 textual conventions (TC) + of SNMP - for feedback collection two similar textual conventions + have been defined in this PIB: Usage32 and Usage64. + + In addition to the differential functionality of 'Counter', where + only the difference between two samples generally carries + information, a single value of a 'Usage' attribute usually provides + absolute information, since + + - its initial value is known (0) + - no wrap-around events should occur + - the time or event when the initial value was set should be + available directly or indirectly from other objects. + + When 'Usage' attributes are defined in a PRC, events that could cause + a reset of the attribute to its initial value should be defined in + the description as well as the mechanism that allows the PDP to + detect the time of the last reset. + + No usual COPS activity however should cause the reset of a Usage + attribute. In the case of a suspension of monitoring activity + (frwkFeedbackActionIndicator set to 'suspendMonitoringAndReports'), + 'Usage' attributes should keep their values and continue counting + after monitoring is resumed. + + + + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 8] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + +3.3. Feedback Groups and PRCs + + These policy classes defined in this PIB are common to account type + reporting for various technologies and apply to ALL SUBJECT- + CATEGORIES. The policy classes are divided into three new groups, + namely, The Feedback Report Group, The Feedback Usage Group and The + Feedback Selection Group. + + The policy classes in the Feedback Report Group are: + + - Feedback Action + - Feedback Action List + - Feedback Selection Usage Combination Capability + - Feedback Linkage + - Feedback Traffic Statistics Threshold + + The policy classes in the Feedback Usage Group are: + + - Feedback Traffic + - Feedback Interface Traffic + + The policy class in the Feedback Selection Group is: + + - Feedback RoleCombo Filter Selection + +3.3.1. Feedback Action + + The Feedback Action class contains the attributes that specify action + that the PEP is to take regarding policy usage, monitoring and + tracking. The PDP may suspend usage monitoring and periodic + reporting, suspend periodic reporting only, resume usage and periodic + reporting or solicit immediate reporting. The action may affect all + feedback policies or be associated with one or more frwkFeedbackLink + instances. + + The frwkFeedbackActionIndicator attribute defines the action. The + frwkFeedbackActionPri attribute indicates whether the action applies + to all of the usage policies or to a list. The + frwkFeedbackActionList attribute is the identifier of the list of + Linkage policy instances to which the action is to be applied. + + The PDP can solicit the PEP for immediate usage feedback. The PEP + shall respond with a solicited report containing the usage feedback. + + The PDP can direct the resumption of usage monitoring and reporting + per the defined intervals. For example, the PEP may have re- + connected to a PDP and has cached usage policies. The PDP indicates + to the PEP to resume usage tracking and monitoring and to send all + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 9] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + the cached usage policy. The PEP shall respond at the next + appropriate interval with an unsolicited report containing the usage + feedback. + + The PDP can suspend the monitoring of usage policy. The PEP + maintains the current usage that has been monitored, but discontinues + any further monitoring until the PDP directs the PEP to resume + monitoring in a subsequent Decision. + + The PDP can also suspend just the reporting of usage, but not + interrupt the monitoring and tracking of usage. The PEP shall + discontinue sending Report messages with usage feedback until the PDP + directs the PEP to resume. The PEP then begins reporting the usage + feedback at the next interval. + +3.3.2. Feedback Action List + + This class defines sets of linkage instances that can be referred to + from the frwkFeedbackActionList attribute. + +3.3.3. Feedback Linkage Capability + + This class defines the valid selection criteria PRC, usage PRC and + threshold PRC combinations supported by the PEP. + +3.3.4. Feedback Linkage + + This class links the selection criteria instance with the usage + class. This table permits the reuse of a selection criteria instance + for multiple usage policies. + + The linkage table also permits the definition of a maximum reporting + interval to use when issuing the COPS accounting type reports for the + usage instance. A value of 0 in this attribute indicates that the + usage policy must be solicited. + +3.3.5. Feedback Traffic Statistics Threshold + + This class is used to provide threshold values for the attributes + described in the traffic usage classes below. + +3.3.6. Feedback Traffic + + This class includes the packet counts, byte counts and a reference to + the associated Linkage instance. + + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 10] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + +3.3.7. Feedback Interface Traffic + + This class is similar to the previous Feedback Traffic class, except + that it includes an additional reference to an interface index. This + class should be used with a selection criteria instance that matches + an element that is assigned to multiple interfaces. The interface + field can be used to associate the instances of this table with the + specific element's assignment. + +3.3.8. Feedback RoleCombo Filter Selection + + This class is used as selection criteria based on role combination, + capability set and a filter instance. + +4. The Feedback Framework PIB Module + + FRAMEWORK-FEEDBACK-PIB PIB-DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN + + IMPORTS + pib, Unsigned32, Unsigned64, Integer32, + MODULE-IDENTITY, OBJECT-TYPE, MODULE-COMPLIANCE, OBJECT-GROUP + FROM COPS-PR-SPPI + TruthValue, TEXTUAL-CONVENTION + FROM SNMPv2-TC + InstanceId, ReferenceId, Prid, + TagId, TagReferenceId + FROM COPS-PR-SPPI-TC + PrcIdentifierOid, PrcIdentifierOidOrZero + FROM FRAMEWORK-TC-PIB + frwkRoleComboEntry + FROM FRAMEWORK-PIB + InterfaceIndex + FROM IF-MIB; + + frwkFeedbackPib MODULE-IDENTITY + SUBJECT-CATEGORIES { all } + LAST-UPDATED "200307140000Z" -- 14 July 2003 + ORGANIZATION "IETF RAP WG" + CONTACT-INFO "IETF RAP WG + Email: rap@ops.ietf.org + + Diana Rawlins + MCI + 400 International Parkway + Richardson, Texas 75081 + Phone: 972-729-4071 + Email: Diana.Rawlins@mci.com + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 11] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + Amol Kulkarni + JF3-206 + 2111 NE 25th Ave + Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 + Phone: 503-712-1168 + Email: amol.kulkarni@intel.com + + Kwok Ho Chan + Nortel Networks + 600 Technology Park Drive + Billerica, MA 01821 USA + Phone: 978-288-8175 + Email: khchan@nortelnetworks.com + + Martin Bokaemper + Juniper Networks + 700 Silver Seven Road + Kanata, ON, K2V 1C3, Canada + Phone: 613-591-2735 + Email: mbokaemper@juniper.net + + Dinesh G Dutt + Cisco Systems, Inc. + 170 Tasman Dr. + San Jose, CA 95134-1706 + Phone: 408-527-0955 + Email: ddutt@cisco.com" + + DESCRIPTION + "The PIB module containing the base set of policy rule + classes that are required for support of all policy + usage monitoring, tracking and reporting policies. + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). This version + of this PIB module is part of RFC 3571; see the RFC + itself for full legal notices." + REVISION "200307140000Z" + DESCRIPTION + "Initial version, published in RFC 3571." + + ::= { pib 5 } + + -- + -- Textual Conventions + -- + + Usage32 ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION + STATUS current + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 12] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + DESCRIPTION + "The Usage32 type represents a non-negative integer + which monotonically increases. + Usage32 initial value is 0 and the object-type using + Usage32 needs to specify when it is initialized. + + The Usage32 type is intended to reflect the absolute + number of counted events, so that even a new PDP + after a COPS reconnect can use the value directly. + + If there is the possibility that the maximum Usage32 + value of 2^32-1 is exceeded during the lifetime + of the Usage32 object, the larger Usage64 type + should be used. + + If conditions other than the reset of the COPS + subsystem exist that disrupt the monotonic + characteristics of Usage32, these conditions and a + method how to detect their presence should be + specified in the description of the object-type using + Usage32 or its enclosing object-types (e.g. the + Entry or Table object-type of the Usage32 + object-type). + + Whenever the monotonic increase of Usage32 is violated, + it should be reset to 0 and the fact that this occurred + should be indicated through an appropriate mechanism, + for example a corresponding object of type TimeStamp + or TimeAndDate." + SYNTAX Unsigned32 + + Usage64 ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The Usage64 type represents a non-negative integer + which monotonically increases. + Usage64 initial value is 0 and the object-type using + Usage64 needs to specify when it is initialized. + + The Usage64 type is intended to reflect the absolute + number of counted events, so that even a new PDP + after a COPS reconnect can use the value directly. + + The lifetime of the Usage64 object should be defined + in a way that ensures the maximum Usage64 value of + 2^64-1 is never exceeded. + + If conditions other than the reset of the COPS + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 13] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + subsystem exist that disrupt the monotonic + characteristics of Usage64, these conditions and a + method how to detect their presence should be + specified in the description of the object-type using + Usage64 or its enclosing object-types (e.g. the + Entry or Table object-type of the Usage64 + object-type). + + Whenever the monotonic increase of Usage64 is violated, + it should be reset to 0 and the fact that this occurred + should be indicated through an appropriate mechanism, + for example a corresponding object of type TimeStamp + or TimeAndDate." + SYNTAX Unsigned64 + + -- + -- The feedback report group + -- + + frwkFeedbackGroupClasses + OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { frwkFeedbackPib 1 } + + -- + -- Feedback Action Table + -- + + frwkFeedbackActionTable OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF FrwkFeedbackActionEntry + PIB-ACCESS install + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "This class represents commands that the PDP sends to + suspend, resume or solicit collection or reporting of + usage data." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackGroupClasses 1} + + frwkFeedbackActionEntry OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX FrwkFeedbackActionEntry + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Each frwkFeedbackActionEntry represents a command from + the PDP. FrwkFeedbackActionIndicator specifies the + command itself while frwkFeedbackActionSpecificPri + indicates if all frwkFeedbackLink objects in the system + are affected by the command, or just the set that is + referenced by frwkFeedbackActionList." + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 14] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + PIB-INDEX { frwkFeedbackActionId} + + ::= { frwkFeedbackActionTable 1} + + FrwkFeedbackActionEntry ::= SEQUENCE { + frwkFeedbackActionId InstanceId, + frwkFeedbackActionIndicator INTEGER, + frwkFeedbackActionSpecificPri TruthValue, + frwkFeedbackActionList TagReferenceId + } + + frwkFeedbackActionId OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX InstanceId + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "An arbitrary integer index that uniquely identifies an + instance of the frwkFeedbackAction class." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackActionEntry 1} + + frwkFeedbackActionIndicator OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX INTEGER { + suspendMonitoringAndReports(1), + suspendReports(2), + resume(3), + solicitReport(4) + } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The value indicates if the PEP is to send cached + usage policies via COPS accounting type report + messages. + The enumeration values are: + (1) suspendMonitoringAndReports + (2) suspendReports + (3) resume + (4) solicitReport " + + ::= { frwkFeedbackActionEntry 2 } + + frwkFeedbackActionSpecificPri OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX TruthValue + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "A value of 0 indicates that the + frwkFeedbackActionList attribute should be ignored, + and the action applied to all policies. A value of + 1 indicates that the action entry has a specific + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 15] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + list of policies to which it is to be applied." + ::= { frwkFeedbackActionEntry 3} + + frwkFeedbackActionList OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX TagReferenceId + PIB-TAG { frwkFeedbackActionListTag } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Identifies a group of frwkFeedbackLink instances + that this action should affect. The group is + identified through a tag reference in the + frwkFeedbackList class." + ::= { frwkFeedbackActionEntry 4} + + -- + -- Feedback Action List Table + -- + + frwkFeedbackActionListTable OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF FrwkFeedbackActionListEntry + PIB-ACCESS install + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "This class defines groups of linkage instances. + Groups can be referenced by commands sent by the + PDP in a frwkFeedbackActionEntry -in this case the + command affects all linkage instances that are part + of the group. + A group can be referred to by its tag stored in + frwkFeedbackActionListTag." + ::= { frwkFeedbackGroupClasses 2} + + frwkFeedbackActionListEntry OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX FrwkFeedbackActionListEntry + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Each instance associates a linkage instance with a + specific ActionListGroup." + + PIB-INDEX {frwkFeedbackActionListId } + UNIQUENESS { frwkFeedbackActionListTag, + frwkFeedbackActionListRefID + } + ::= { frwkFeedbackActionListTable 1} + + FrwkFeedbackActionListEntry::= SEQUENCE { + frwkFeedbackActionListId InstanceId, + frwkFeedbackActionListTag TagId, + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 16] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + frwkFeedbackActionListRefID ReferenceId + } + + frwkFeedbackActionListId OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX InstanceId + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Arbitrary integer index that uniquely + identifies an instance of the class." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackActionListEntry 1 } + + frwkFeedbackActionListTag OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX TagId + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Identifies a group of linkage instances that can + be referenced from the Action class." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackActionListEntry 2 } + + frwkFeedbackActionListRefID OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX ReferenceId + PIB-REFERENCES { frwkFeedbackLinkEntry } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "A frwkFeedbackLink instance that is referred to + by this ReferenceId becomes part of the group, + that is identified by the + frwkFeedbackActionListTag." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackActionListEntry 3 } + + -- + -- The Feedback Link Capability Table + -- + + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsTable OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF FrwkFeedbackLinkCapsEntry + PIB-ACCESS notify + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Instances of the frwkFeedbackLink class reference + instances of selection and threshold classes and a + usage class. + This class allows the PEP to communicate valid + combinations of these three classes to the PDP." + ::= { frwkFeedbackGroupClasses 3} + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 17] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsEntry OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX FrwkFeedbackLinkCapsEntry + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The attributes of this class identify valid + combinations of selection criteria, usage and + threshold classes for feedback." + PIB-INDEX { frwkFeedbackLinkCapsId } + UNIQUENESS { + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsSelection, + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsUsage, + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsThreshold + } + + ::= {frwkFeedbackLinkCapsTable 1} + + FrwkFeedbackLinkCapsEntry ::= SEQUENCE { + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsId InstanceId, + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsSelection PrcIdentifierOid, + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsUsage PrcIdentifierOid, + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsThreshold PrcIdentifierOidOrZero + } + + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsId OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX InstanceId + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "An arbitrary integer index that uniquely identifies an + instance of the frwkFeedbackLinkCaps class." + ::= { frwkFeedbackLinkCapsEntry 1} + + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsSelection OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX PrcIdentifierOid + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The identifier of a class that is supported by the + device for feedback selection in combination with the + usage and threshold classes referenced in this + instance." + ::= { frwkFeedbackLinkCapsEntry 2} + + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsUsage OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX PrcIdentifierOid + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The identifier of the usage class that is supported by + the PEP in combination with the selection and threshold + classes referenced in this instance." + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 18] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + ::= { frwkFeedbackLinkCapsEntry 3} + + + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsThreshold OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX PrcIdentifierOidOrZero + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The identifier of the threshold class that is + supported by the PEP in combination with the selection + and usage classes referenced in this instance. + 0.0 is used if this combination does not allow a + threshold." + ::= { frwkFeedbackLinkCapsEntry 4} + + -- + -- The Feedback Report Linkage Table + -- + + frwkFeedbackLinkTable OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF FrwkFeedbackLinkEntry + PIB-ACCESS install + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "This class associates the selection criteria with the + usage policy. It also permits the defining of the max + interval used for reporting the usage instance." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackGroupClasses 4} + + frwkFeedbackLinkEntry OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX FrwkFeedbackLinkEntry + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "This class associates the selection criteria with the + usage policy. It also permits the defining of the max + interval used for reporting the usage instance." + PIB-INDEX { frwkFeedbackLinkId } + UNIQUENESS {frwkFeedbackLinkSel, + frwkFeedbackLinkUsage } + ::= {frwkFeedbackLinkTable 1} + + FrwkFeedbackLinkEntry ::= SEQUENCE { + frwkFeedbackLinkId InstanceId, + frwkFeedbackLinkSel Prid, + frwkFeedbackLinkUsage PrcIdentifierOid, + frwkFeedbackLinkInterval Integer32, + frwkFeedbackLinkThreshold Prid, + frwkFeedbackLinkFlags BITS + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 19] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + } + + frwkFeedbackLinkId OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX InstanceId + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "An arbitrary integer index that uniquely identifies an + instance of the frwkFeedbackLinkTable class." + ::= { frwkFeedbackLinkEntry 1} + + frwkFeedbackLinkSel OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX Prid + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The PRID of the Policy Class instance as the monitoring + point, or the PRID of the selection criteria instance that + defines the conditions for monitoring, to be use by the + PEP for usage reporting." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackLinkEntry 2} + + frwkFeedbackLinkUsage OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX PrcIdentifierOid + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The identifier of the usage class that the PEP uses to + monitor, record and report." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackLinkEntry 3} + + frwkFeedbackLinkInterval OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX Integer32 + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Maximum interval in units of the value of the + Accounting Timer specified by the PDP in the client + accept message. A frwkFeedbackLinkInterval of 1 is + equal to the value of the Accounting Timer. This value + must be 1 or greater. " + + ::= { frwkFeedbackLinkEntry 4} + + frwkFeedbackLinkThreshold OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX Prid + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The PRID of a threshold class instance. This instance + specifies the threshold values for the usage policy." + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 20] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + ::= { frwkFeedbackLinkEntry 5} + + frwkFeedbackLinkFlags OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX BITS { + periodic(0), + threshold(1), + changeOnly(2) + } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "This value indicates the reporting basis of the usage + policy. The feed back may be generated on demand, on a + periodic basis regardless of a change in value from the + previous report, on a periodic basis if a change in + value has occurred, or the usage is reported when an + identified threshold value in the usage instance has + been reached. + If the 'periodic' flag is set, the PEP will provide + unsolicited reports at the rate specified in + frwkFeedbackLinkInterval. + If the 'periodic' flag is not set, reports will only be + generated when solicited by the PDP. + The 'threshold' and 'changeOnly' flags make the + periodic reports conditional - these flags only make + sense in combination with the 'periodic' flag." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackLinkEntry 6} + + -- + -- The Threshold class that accompanies the above Usage PRCs + -- + + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresTable OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF FrwkFeedbackTrafficThresEntry + PIB-ACCESS install + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "This class defines the threshold attributes + corresponding to usage attributes specified in + frwkFeedbackTrafficTable, frwkFeedbackIfTrafficTable + and other similar usage classes. + + The usage object is considered to match the threshold + condition if at least one of the packet or byte + threshold conditions match. + + The byte and packet thresholds are considered to + match, if the threshold is present (not ASN1 NULL) + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 21] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + and the corresponding usage value exceeds the + threshold." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackGroupClasses 5} + + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresEntry OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX FrwkFeedbackTrafficThresEntry + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Defines the attributes to hold threshold values." + PIB-INDEX {frwkFeedbackTrafficThresId} + + ::= {frwkFeedbackTrafficThresTable 1} + + FrwkFeedbackTrafficThresEntry ::= SEQUENCE { + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresId InstanceId, + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresPackets Unsigned64, + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresBytes Unsigned64 + } + + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresId OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX InstanceId + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Arbitrary integer index that uniquely identifies + an instance of the class." + ::= { frwkFeedbackTrafficThresEntry 1 } + + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresPackets OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX Unsigned64 + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The threshold, in terms of packets, that must be + matched or exceeded to trigger a report in the + next reporting interval." + ::= { frwkFeedbackTrafficThresEntry 2 } + + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresBytes OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX Unsigned64 + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The threshold, in terms of bytes, that must be + exceeded to trigger a report in the next reporting + interval." + ::= { frwkFeedbackTrafficThresEntry 3 } + + + -- + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 22] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + -- All actual usage classes are in the separate + -- frwkFeedbackUsageClasses group + -- + + frwkFeedbackUsageClasses + OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { frwkFeedbackPib 2 } + + + -- + -- The generic traffic (byte & packet count) usage class + -- + + frwkFeedbackTrafficTable OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF FrwkFeedbackTrafficEntry + PIB-ACCESS report-only + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "This class defines the usage attributes that the PEP + is to monitor for plain traffic handling elements + like filters. All packets and the bytes contained in + these packets are counted. It also contains the PRID + of the linkage instance associating the selection + criteria instance with the usage instance." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackUsageClasses 1} + + frwkFeedbackTrafficEntry OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX FrwkFeedbackTrafficEntry + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Defines the attributes the PEP is to monitor, + record and report." + PIB-INDEX {frwkFeedbackTrafficId} + UNIQUENESS { frwkFeedbackTrafficLinkRefID } + + ::= {frwkFeedbackTrafficTable 1} + + FrwkFeedbackTrafficEntry ::= SEQUENCE { + frwkFeedbackTrafficId InstanceId, + frwkFeedbackTrafficLinkRefID ReferenceId, + frwkFeedbackTrafficPacketCount Usage64, + frwkFeedbackTrafficByteCount Usage64 + + } + + frwkFeedbackTrafficId OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX InstanceId + STATUS current + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 23] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + DESCRIPTION + "Arbitrary integer index that uniquely identifies + an instance of the class." + ::= { frwkFeedbackTrafficEntry 1 } + + frwkFeedbackTrafficLinkRefID OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX ReferenceId + PIB-REFERENCES { frwkFeedbackLinkEntry } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The ReferenceId of the Linkage policy instance used + to base this usage policy instance upon." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackTrafficEntry 2 } + + frwkFeedbackTrafficPacketCount OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX Usage64 + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The count of packets handled by the associated + element. The initial value of 0 is set when the + frwkFeedbackTraffic instance is created, for example + triggered through the creation of a frwkFeedbackLink + instance." + + ::= {frwkFeedbackTrafficEntry 3} + + frwkFeedbackTrafficByteCount OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX Usage64 + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The byte count of packets handled by the associated + element. The initial value of 0 is set when the + frwkFeedbackTraffic instance is created." + ::= { frwkFeedbackTrafficEntry 4} + + + + -- + -- The traffic usage class, qualified for an interface + -- + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficTable OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF FrwkFeedbackIfTrafficEntry + PIB-ACCESS report-only + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "A usage class similar to the basic Traffic class that + also contains a reference to an interface index. This + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 24] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + class should be used with an underspecified selection + criteria entry from the frwkRoleComboTable that matches + an element that can be assigned to multiple interface + indices. The interface field can be used to associate + the instances of this class with the specific element's + assignment." + ::= { frwkFeedbackUsageClasses 2 } + + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficEntry OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX FrwkFeedbackIfTrafficEntry + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Defines the attributes the PEP is to monitor, + record and report." + PIB-INDEX {frwkFeedbackIfTrafficId} + UNIQUENESS { frwkFeedbackIfTrafficLinkRefID, + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficIfIndex } + + ::= {frwkFeedbackIfTrafficTable 1} + + FrwkFeedbackIfTrafficEntry ::= SEQUENCE { + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficId InstanceId, + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficLinkRefID ReferenceId, + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficIfIndex InterfaceIndex, + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficPacketCount Usage64, + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficByteCount Usage64 + + } + + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficId OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX InstanceId + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Arbitrary integer index that uniquely identifies + an instance of the class." + ::= { frwkFeedbackIfTrafficEntry 1 } + + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficLinkRefID OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX ReferenceId + PIB-REFERENCES { frwkFeedbackLinkEntry } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The ReferenceId of the Linkage policy instance used + to base this usage policy instance upon." + ::= { frwkFeedbackIfTrafficEntry 2 } + + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficIfIndex OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX InterfaceIndex + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 25] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The value of this attribute is the ifIndex which is + associated with the specified RoleCombination and + interface capability set name." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackIfTrafficEntry 3 } + + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficPacketCount OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX Usage64 + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The count of packets handled by the associated + element. The initial value of 0 is set when the + frwkFeedbackIfTraffic instance is created." + ::= { frwkFeedbackIfTrafficEntry 4 } + + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficByteCount OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX Usage64 + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The byte count of packets handled by the associated + element. The initial value of 0 is set when the + frwkFeedbackIfTraffic instance is created." + ::= { frwkFeedbackIfTrafficEntry 5 } + + + -- + -- All Selection classes are in the separate + -- FrwkFeedbackSelectionClasses group + -- + + frwkFeedbackSelectionClasses + OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { frwkFeedbackPib 3 } + + -- + -- The Role Combination Filter Selection Table + -- + + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelTable OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF FrwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelEntry + PIB-ACCESS install + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "A selection class that defines selection of objects + for monitoring based on the role combination, + capability set and a filter." + ::= { frwkFeedbackSelectionClasses 1 } + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 26] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelEntry OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX FrwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelEntry + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Each instance selects a filter on multiple interfaces + that share the same frwkRoleCombo instance." + PIB-INDEX { frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelId} + UNIQUENESS { frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelRCombo, + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelFilter + } + + ::= {frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelTable 1} + + FrwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelEntry ::= SEQUENCE { + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelId InstanceId, + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelRCombo ReferenceId, + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelFilter Prid + } + + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelId OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX InstanceId + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Arbitrary integer index that uniquely identifies + an instance of the class." + ::= { frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelEntry 1 } + + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelRCombo OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX ReferenceId + PIB-REFERENCES { frwkRoleComboEntry } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The ReferenceId of the frwkRoleComboTable policy + instance used for selection." + ::= { frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelEntry 2 } + + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelFilter OBJECT-TYPE + SYNTAX Prid + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "The identifier of a filter instance. Valid classes + are the subclasses of frwkBaseFilter: + - frwkIpFilter + - frwk802Filter + - frwkILabelFilter" + ::= { frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelEntry 3 } + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 27] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + -- + -- Compliance Section + -- + + frwkFeedbackPibConformance + OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { frwkFeedbackPib 4 } + + frwkFeedbackPibCompliances + OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { frwkFeedbackPibConformance 1 } + + frwkFeedbackPibGroups + OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { frwkFeedbackPibConformance 2 } + + + frwkFeedbackPibCompliance MODULE-COMPLIANCE + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Describes the requirements for conformance to the feedback + framework PIB" + + MODULE -- this module + MANDATORY-GROUPS { frwkFeedbackLinkCapsGroup, + frwkFeedbackLinkGroup, + frwkFeedbackActionGroup } + + GROUP frwkFeedbackActionListGroup + DESCRIPTION + "The frwkFeedbackActionListGroup is mandatory if + actions on subsets linkEntries are to be + supported." + + GROUP frwkFeedbackTrafficGroup + DESCRIPTION + "The frwkFeedbackTrafficGroup is mandatory if + monitoring of traffic data is to be supported." + + GROUP frwkFeedbackTrafficThresGroup + DESCRIPTION + "The frwkFeedbackTrafficThresGroup is mandatory + if conditional reporting of traffic usage + thresholds is to be supported." + + GROUP frwkFeedbackIfTrafficGroup + DESCRIPTION + "The frwkFeedbackIfTrafficGroup is mandatory if + per-interface usage collection of traffic data is + to be supported." + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 28] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + GROUP frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelGroup + DESCRIPTION + "The frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelGroup is mandatory + if monitoring of filters referenced through the + frwkRoleCombo class is to be supported." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackPibCompliances 1 } + + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsGroup OBJECT-GROUP + OBJECTS { + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsId, + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsSelection, + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsUsage, + frwkFeedbackLinkCapsThreshold } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Objects from the frwkFeedbackLinkCapsTable." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackPibGroups 1 } + + frwkFeedbackLinkGroup OBJECT-GROUP + OBJECTS { + frwkFeedbackLinkId, + frwkFeedbackLinkSel, + frwkFeedbackLinkUsage, + frwkFeedbackLinkInterval, + frwkFeedbackLinkThreshold, + frwkFeedbackLinkFlags } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Objects from the frwkFeedbackLinkTable." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackPibGroups 2 } + + frwkFeedbackActionGroup OBJECT-GROUP + OBJECTS { + frwkFeedbackActionId, + frwkFeedbackActionIndicator, + frwkFeedbackActionSpecificPri, + frwkFeedbackActionList } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Objects from the frwkFeedbackActionTable." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackPibGroups 3 } + + frwkFeedbackActionListGroup OBJECT-GROUP + OBJECTS { + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 29] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + frwkFeedbackActionListId, + frwkFeedbackActionListTag, + frwkFeedbackActionListRefID } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Objects from the frwkFeedbackActionListTable." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackPibGroups 4 } + + frwkFeedbackTrafficGroup OBJECT-GROUP + OBJECTS { + frwkFeedbackTrafficId, + frwkFeedbackTrafficLinkRefID, + frwkFeedbackTrafficPacketCount, + frwkFeedbackTrafficByteCount } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Objects from the frwkFeedbackTrafficTable." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackPibGroups 5 } + + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresGroup OBJECT-GROUP + OBJECTS { + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresId, + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresPackets, + frwkFeedbackTrafficThresBytes } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Objects from the frwkFeedbackTrafficThresTable." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackPibGroups 6 } + + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficGroup OBJECT-GROUP + OBJECTS { + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficId, + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficLinkRefID, + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficIfIndex, + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficPacketCount, + frwkFeedbackIfTrafficByteCount } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Objects from the frwkFeedbackIfTrafficTable." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackPibGroups 7 } + + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelGroup OBJECT-GROUP + OBJECTS { + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelId, + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 30] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelRCombo, + frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelFilter } + STATUS current + DESCRIPTION + "Objects from the frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSelTable." + + ::= { frwkFeedbackPibGroups 8 } + + END + +5. Security Considerations + + This PIB defines structured information that may be sensitive when + transported by the COPS protocol [COPS-PR]. + + This PIB does not contain classes that directly contain security + relevant information like passwords or monetary amounts. However, + unauthorized access or changes to information defined in this PIB + could compromise network operations or reveal sensitive business or + personal information. + + Specifically for the classes: + + frwkFeedbackLinkCaps + + This class has the ACCESS clause 'notify'. Access to this + information reveals feedback collection capabilities of the COPS + client and malicious changes could affect feedback operation by + misleading the server to generate corrupt feedback configuration. + + frwkFeedbackLinkTable, frwkFeedbackAction, frwkFeedbackActionList, + frwkFeedbackTrafficThres, frwkFeedbackRoleFilterSel + + These classes have the ACCESS clause 'install' and allow the COPS + server to control feedback collection and reporting on the client. + Access to this information exposes the client's configuration; + malicious changes could disrupt network or business operations and + raise privacy issues. + + frwkFeedbackTraffic, frwkFeedbackIfTraffic + + These classes have the ACCESS clause 'report-only' and contain the + usage information delivered from the COPS client to the server. + Unauthorized access to this information may reveal detailed + information on the network and its users. Malicious changes may + affect network and business operations. + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 31] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + [COPS] and [COPS-PR] define mechanisms to secure the COPS protocol + communication and implementations of COPS servers or clients + supporting this PIB MUST follow the security guidelines specified + there. + +6. IANA Considerations + + This document describes the frwkFeedbackPib Policy Information Base + (PIB) module for registration under the "pib" branch registered with + IANA. The IANA has assigned PIB number 5. + + This PIB uses "all" in the SUBJECT-CATEGORY clause, so it applies to + all COPS client types. No new COPS client type is requested for this + PIB. + +7. Acknowledgements + + The authors would like to thank Dave Durham, Ravi Sahita, and Russell + Fenger of Intel and John K. Gallant of WorldCom for their + contribution to this document. + +8. References + +8.1. Normative References + + [COPS] Durham, D., Boyle, J., Cohen, R., Herzog, S., Rajan, + R. and A. Sastry, "The COPS (Common Open Policy + Service) Protocol", RFC 2748, January 2000. + + [COPS-PR] Chan, K., Seligson, J., Durham, D., Gai, S., + McCloghrie, K., Herzog, S., Reichmeyer, F., Yavatkar, + R. and A. Smith, "COPS Usage for Policy + Provisioning", RFC 3084, May 2001. + + [IFMIB] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces + Group MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000. + + [FR-PIB] Sahita, R., Hahn, S., Chan, K. and K. McCloghrie, + "Framework Policy Information Base", RFC 3318, March + 2003. + + [FEEDBACKFWK] Rawlins, D., Kulkarni, A., Bokaemper, M. and K. Chan, + "Framework for Policy Usage Feedback for Common Open + Policy Service with Policy Provisioning (COPS-PR)", + RFC 3483, March 2003. + + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 32] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + + [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. + +8.2. Informational References + + [COPS-TLS], Walker, J., Kulkarni, A.,"COPS Over TLS", Work in + Progress. + + [DIFFSERV-PIB] Chan, K., Sahita, R., Hahn, S. and K. McCloghrie, + "Differentiated Services Quality of Service Policy + Information Base", RFC 3317, March 2003. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 33] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + +9. Authors' Addresses + + Diana Rawlins + MCI + 400 International Parkway + Richardson, Texas 75081 + + Phone: 972-729-4071 + EMail: Diana.Rawlins@mci.com + + Amol Kulkarni + JF3-206 + 2111 NE 25th Ave + Hillsboro, Oregon 97124 + + Phone: 503-712-1168 + EMail: amol.kulkarni@intel.com + + Kwok Ho Chan + Nortel Networks + 600 Technology Park Drive + Billerica, MA 01821 USA + + Phone: 978-288-8175 + EMail: khchan@nortelnetworks.com + + Martin Bokaemper + Juniper Networks + 700 Silver Seven Road + Kanata, ON, K2V 1C3, Canada + + Phone: 613-591-2735 + EMail: mbokaemper@juniper.net + + Dinesh G Dutt + Cisco Systems, Inc. + 170 Tasman Dr. + San Jose, CA 95134-1706 + + Phone: 408-527-0955 + EMail: ddutt@cisco.com + + + + + + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 34] + +RFC 3571 Framework Feedback PIB August 2003 + + +10. Full Copyright Statement + + Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved. + + This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to + others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it + or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published + and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any + kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are + included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this + document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing + the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other + Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of + developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for + copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be + followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than + English. + + The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be + revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees. + + This document and the information contained herein is provided on an + "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING + TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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. + +Acknowledgement + + Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the + Internet Society. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Rawlins, et al. Informational [Page 35] + |