💾 Archived View for gemini.bortzmeyer.org › rfc-mirror › rfc1473.txt captured on 2022-06-12 at 01:26:12.
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Network Working Group F. Kastenholz
Request for Comments: 1473 FTP Software, Inc.
June 1993
The Definitions of Managed Objects for
the IP Network Control Protocol of
the Point-to-Point Protocol
Status of this Memo
This RFC specifies an IAB standards track protocol for the Internet
community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Please refer to the current edition of the "IAB Official Protocol
Standards" for the standardization state and status of this protocol.
Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Abstract
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
for use with network management protocols in TCP/IP-based internets.
In particular, it describes managed objects used for managing the IP
Network Control Protocol on subnetwork interfaces using the family of
Point-to-Point Protocols [8, 9, 10, 11, & 12].
Table of Contents
1. The Network Management Framework ...................... 1
2. Objects ............................................... 2
2.1 Format of Definitions ................................ 2
3. Overview .............................................. 2
3.1 Object Selection Criteria ............................ 2
3.2 Structure of the PPP ................................. 2
3.3 MIB Groups ........................................... 3
4. Definitions ........................................... 4
5. Acknowledgements ...................................... 8
6. Security Considerations ............................... 8
7. References ............................................ 8
8. Author's Address ...................................... 9
1. The Network Management Framework
The Internet-standard Network Management Framework consists of three
components. They are:
STD 16/RFC 1155 which defines the SMI, the mechanisms used for
describing and naming objects for the purpose of management. STD
16/RFC 1212 defines a more concise description mechanism, which is
Kastenholz [Page 1]
RFC 1473 PPP/IP MIB June 1993
wholly consistent with the SMI.
STD 17/RFC 1213 which defines MIB-II, the core set of managed
objects for the Internet suite of protocols.
STD 15/RFC 1157 which defines the SNMP, the protocol used for
network access to managed objects.
The Framework permits new objects to be defined for the purpose of
experimentation and evaluation.
2. Objects
Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed
the Management Information Base or MIB. Objects in the MIB are
defined using the subset of Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) [3]
defined in the SMI. In particular, each object type is named by an
OBJECT IDENTIFIER, an administratively assigned name. The object
type together with an object instance serves to uniquely identify a
specific instantiation of the object. For human convenience, we
often use a textual string, termed the descriptor, to refer to the
object type.
2.1. Format of Definitions
Section 4 contains the specification of all object types contained in
this MIB module. The object types are defined using the conventions
defined in the SMI, as amended by the extensions specified in [5,6].
3. Overview
3.1. Object Selection Criteria
To be consistent with IAB directives and good engineering practice,
an explicit attempt was made to keep this MIB as simple as possible.
This was accomplished by applying the following criteria to objects
proposed for inclusion:
(1) Require objects be essential for either fault or
configuration management. In particular, objects for
which the sole purpose was to debug implementations were
explicitly excluded from the MIB.
(2) Consider evidence of current use and/or utility.
(3) Limit the total number of objects.
(4) Exclude objects which are simply derivable from others in
Kastenholz [Page 2]
RFC 1473 PPP/IP MIB June 1993
this or other MIBs.
3.2. Structure of the PPP
This section describes the basic model of PPP used in developing the
PPP MIB. This information should be useful to the implementor in
understanding some of the basic design decisions of the MIB.
The PPP is not one single protocol but a large family of protocols.
Each of these is, in itself, a fairly complex protocol. The PPP
protocols may be divided into three rough categories:
Control Protocols
The Control Protocols are used to control the operation of the
PPP. The Control Protocols include the Link Control Protocol
(LCP), the Password Authentication Protocol (PAP), the Link
Quality Report (LQR), and the Challenge Handshake Authentication
Protocol (CHAP).
Network Protocols
The Network Protocols are used to move the network traffic over
the PPP interface. A Network Protocol encapsulates the datagrams
of a specific higher-layer protocol that is using the PPP as a
data link. Note that within the context of PPP, the term "Network
Protocol" does not imply an OSI Layer-3 protocol; for instance,
there is a Bridging network protocol.
Network Control Protocols (NCPs)
The NCPs are used to control the operation of the Network
Protocols. Generally, each Network Protocol has its own Network
Control Protocol; thus, the IP Network Protocol has its IP Control
Protocol, the Bridging Network Protocol has its Bridging Network
Control Protocol and so on.
This document specifies the objects used in managing one of these
protocols, namely the IP Network Control Protocol.
3.3. MIB Groups
Objects in this MIB are arranged into several MIB groups. Each group
is organized as a set of related objects.
These groups are the basic unit of conformance: if the semantics of a
group are applicable to an implementation then all objects in the
group must be implemented.
The PPP MIB is organized into several MIB Groups, including, but not
limited to, the following groups:
Kastenholz [Page 3]
RFC 1473 PPP/IP MIB June 1993
o The PPP Link Group
o The PPP LQR Group
o The PPP LQR Extensions Group
o The PPP IP Group
o The PPP Bridge Group
o The PPP Security Group
This document specifies the following group:
The PPP IP Group
The PPP IP Group contains configuration, status, and control
variables that apply to the operation of IP over PPP.
Implementation of this group is mandatory for all implementations
of PPP that support IP over PPP.
4. Definitions
PPP-IP-NCP-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN
IMPORTS
Counter
FROM RFC1155-SMI
ifIndex
FROM RFC1213-MIB
OBJECT-TYPE
FROM RFC-1212
ppp
FROM PPP-LCP-MIB;
-- The PPP IP Group.
-- Implementation of this group is mandatory for all
-- PPP implementations that support operating IP over PPP.
pppIp OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { ppp 3 }
pppIpTable OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF PppIpEntry
ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS mandatory
DESCRIPTION
"Table containing the IP parameters and
statistics for the local PPP entity."
::= { pppIp 1 }
pppIpEntry OBJECT-TYPE
Kastenholz [Page 4]
RFC 1473 PPP/IP MIB June 1993
SYNTAX PppIpEntry
ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS mandatory
DESCRIPTION
"IPCP status information for a particular PPP
link."
INDEX { ifIndex }
::= { pppIpTable 1 }
PppIpEntry ::= SEQUENCE {
pppIpOperStatus
INTEGER,
pppIpLocalToRemoteCompressionProtocol
INTEGER,
pppIpRemoteToLocalCompressionProtocol
INTEGER,
pppIpRemoteMaxSlotId
INTEGER,
pppIpLocalMaxSlotId
INTEGER
}
-- The following object reflect the values of the option
-- parameters used in the PPP IP Control Protocol
-- pppIpLocalToRemoteCompressionProtocol
-- pppIpRemoteToLocalCompressionProtocol
-- pppIpRemoteMaxSlotId
-- pppIpLocalMaxSlotId
-- These values are not available until after the PPP Option
-- negotiation has completed, which is indicated by the link
-- reaching the open state (i.e., pppIpOperStatus is set to
-- opened).
--
-- Therefore, when pppIpOperStatus is not opened
-- the contents of these objects is undefined. The value
-- returned when accessing the objects is an implementation
-- dependent issue.
pppIpOperStatus OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX INTEGER {opened(1), not-opened(2)}
ACCESS read-only
STATUS mandatory
DESCRIPTION
"The operational status of the IP network
protocol. If the value of this object is up
then the finite state machine for the IP
Kastenholz [Page 5]
RFC 1473 PPP/IP MIB June 1993
network protocol has reached the Opened state."
::= { pppIpEntry 1 }
pppIpLocalToRemoteCompressionProtocol OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX INTEGER {
none(1),
vj-tcp(2)
}
ACCESS read-only
STATUS mandatory
DESCRIPTION
"The IP compression protocol that the local
PPP-IP entity uses when sending packets to the
remote PPP-IP entity. The value of this object
is meaningful only when the link has reached
the open state (pppIpOperStatus is opened)."
::= { pppIpEntry 2 }
pppIpRemoteToLocalCompressionProtocol OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX INTEGER {
none(1),
vj-tcp(2)
}
ACCESS read-only
STATUS mandatory
DESCRIPTION
"The IP compression protocol that the remote
PPP-IP entity uses when sending packets to the
local PPP-IP entity. The value of this object
is meaningful only when the link has reached
the open state (pppIpOperStatus is opened)."
::= { pppIpEntry 3 }
pppIpRemoteMaxSlotId OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX INTEGER(0..255)
ACCESS read-only
STATUS mandatory
DESCRIPTION
"The Max-Slot-Id parameter that the remote node
has advertised and that is in use on the link.
If vj-tcp header compression is not in use on
the link then the value of this object shall be
0. The value of this object is meaningful only
when the link has reached the open state
(pppIpOperStatus is opened)."
Kastenholz [Page 6]
RFC 1473 PPP/IP MIB June 1993
::= { pppIpEntry 4 }
pppIpLocalMaxSlotId OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX INTEGER(0..255)
ACCESS read-only
STATUS mandatory
DESCRIPTION
"The Max-Slot-Id parameter that the local node
has advertised and that is in use on the link.
If vj-tcp header compression is not in use on
the link then the value of this object shall be
0. The value of this object is meaningful only
when the link has reached the open state
(pppIpOperStatus is opened)."
::= { pppIpEntry 5 }
--
-- The PPP IP Configuration table.
-- This is a separate table in order to facilitate
-- placing these variables in a separate MIB view.
--
pppIpConfigTable OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF PppIpConfigEntry
ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS mandatory
DESCRIPTION
"Table containing configuration variables for
the IPCP for the local PPP entity."
::= { pppIp 2 }
pppIpConfigEntry OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX PppIpConfigEntry
ACCESS not-accessible
STATUS mandatory
DESCRIPTION
"IPCP information for a particular PPP link."
INDEX { ifIndex }
::= { pppIpConfigTable 1 }
PppIpConfigEntry ::= SEQUENCE {
pppIpConfigAdminStatus
INTEGER,
pppIpConfigCompression
Kastenholz [Page 7]
RFC 1473 PPP/IP MIB June 1993
INTEGER
}
pppIpConfigAdminStatus OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX INTEGER {open(1), close(2)}
ACCESS read-write
STATUS mandatory
DESCRIPTION
"The immediate desired status of the IP network
protocol. Setting this object to open will
inject an administrative open event into the IP
network protocol's finite state machine.
Setting this object to close will inject an
administrative close event into the IP network
protocol's finite state machine."
::= { pppIpConfigEntry 1 }
pppIpConfigCompression OBJECT-TYPE
SYNTAX INTEGER {
none(1),
vj-tcp(2)
}
ACCESS read-write
STATUS mandatory
DESCRIPTION
"If none(1) then the local node will not
attempt to negotiate any IP Compression option.
Otherwise, the local node will attempt to
negotiate compression mode indicated by the
enumerated value. Changing this object will
have effect when the link is next restarted."
REFERENCE
"Section 4.0, Van Jacobson TCP/IP Header
Compression of RFC1332."
DEFVAL { none }
::= { pppIpConfigEntry 2 }
END
5. Acknowledgements
This document was produced by the PPP working group. In addition to
the working group, the author wishes to thank the following
individuals for their comments and contributions:
Bill Simpson -- Daydreamer
Kastenholz [Page 8]
RFC 1473 PPP/IP MIB June 1993
Glenn McGregor -- Merit
Jesse Walker -- DEC
Chris Gunner -- DEC
6. Security Considerations
The PPP MIB affords the network operator the ability to configure and
control the PPP links of a particular system, including the PPP
authentication protocols. This represents a security risk.
These risks are addressed in the following manners:
(1) All variables which represent a significant security risk
are placed in separate, optional, MIB Groups. As the MIB
Group is the quantum of implementation within a MIB, the
implementor of the MIB may elect not to implement these
groups.
(2) The implementor may choose to implement the variables
which present a security risk so that they may not be
written, i.e., the variables are READ-ONLY. This method
still presents a security risk, and is not recommended,
in that the variables, specifically the PPP
Authentication Protocols' variables, may be easily read.
(3) Using SNMPv2, the operator can place the variables into
MIB views which are protected in that the parties which
have access to those MIB views use authentication and
privacy protocols, or the operator may elect to make
these views not accessible to any party. In order to
facilitate this placement, all security-related variables
are placed in separate MIB Tables. This eases the
identification of the necessary MIB View Subtree.
7. References
[1] Rose M., and K. McCloghrie, "Structure and Identification of
Management Information for TCP/IP-based internets", STD 16, RFC
1155, Performance Systems International, Hughes LAN Systems, May
1990.
[2] McCloghrie K., and M. Rose, Editors, "Management Information Base
for Network Management of TCP/IP-based internets", STD 17, RFC
1213, Performance Systems International, March 1991.
[3] Information processing systems - Open Systems Interconnection -
Specification of Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1),
International Organization for Standardization, International
Kastenholz [Page 9]
RFC 1473 PPP/IP MIB June 1993
Standard 8824, December 1987.
[4] Information processing systems - Open Systems Interconnection -
Specification of Basic Encoding Rules for Abstract Notation One
(ASN.1), International Organization for Standardization,
International Standard 8825, December 1987.
[5] Rose, M., and K. McCloghrie, Editors, "Concise MIB Definitions",
STD 16, RFC 1212, Performance Systems International, Hughes LAN
Systems, March 1991.
[6] Rose, M., Editor, "A Convention for Defining Traps for use with
the SNMP", RFC 1215, Performance Systems International, March
1991.
[7] McCloghrie, K., "Extensions to the Generic-Interface MIB", RFC
1229, Hughes LAN Systems, Inc., May 1991.
[8] Simpson, W., "The Point-to-Point Protocol for the Transmission of
Multi-protocol Datagrams over Point-to-Point Links, RFC 1331,
Daydreamer, May 1992.
[9] McGregor, G., "The PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol", RFC
1332, Merit, May 1992.
[10] Baker, F., "Point-to-Point Protocol Extensions for Bridging", RFC
1220, ACC, April 1991.
[11] Lloyd, B., and W. Simpson, "PPP Authentication Protocols", RFC
1334, L&A, Daydreamer, October 1992.
[12] Simpson, W., "PPP Link Quality Monitoring", RFC 1333, Daydreamer,
May 1992.
8. Author's Address
Frank Kastenholz
FTP Software, Inc.
2 High Street
North Andover, Mass 01845 USA
Phone: (508) 685-4000
EMail: kasten@ftp.com
Kastenholz [Page 10]