💾 Archived View for gemini.bortzmeyer.org › rfc-mirror › rfc1449.txt captured on 2023-04-26 at 16:08:24.
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Network Working Group J. Case
Request for Comments: 1449 SNMP Research, Inc.
K. McCloghrie
Hughes LAN Systems
M. Rose
Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.
S. Waldbusser
Carnegie Mellon University
April 1993
Transport Mappings
for version 2 of the
Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2)
Status of this Memo
This RFC specifes 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.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction .......................................... 2
1.1 A Note on Terminology ............................... 2
2 Definitions ........................................... 3
3 SNMPv2 over UDP ....................................... 7
3.1 Serialization ....................................... 7
3.2 Well-known Values ................................... 7
4 SNMPv2 over OSI ....................................... 8
4.1 Serialization ....................................... 8
4.2 Well-known Values ................................... 8
5 SNMPv2 over DDP ....................................... 9
5.1 Serialization ....................................... 9
5.2 Well-known Values ................................... 9
5.3 Discussion of AppleTalk Addressing .................. 9
5.3.1 How to Acquire NBP names .......................... 10
5.3.2 When to Turn NBP names into DDP addresses ......... 11
5.3.3 How to Turn NBP names into DDP addresses .......... 11
5.3.4 What if NBP is broken ............................. 12
6 SNMPv2 over IPX ....................................... 13
6.1 Serialization ....................................... 13
6.2 Well-known Values ................................... 13
7 Proxy to SNMPv1 ....................................... 14
7.1 Transport Domain: rfc1157Domain ..................... 14
7.2 Authentication Algorithm: rfc1157noAuth ............. 14
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page i]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
8 Serialization using the Basic Encoding Rules .......... 16
8.1 Usage Example ....................................... 17
9 Acknowledgements ...................................... 18
10 References ........................................... 22
11 Security Considerations .............................. 24
12 Authors' Addresses ................................... 24
13 Security Considerations .............................. 25
14 Authors' Addresses ................................... 25
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 1]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
1. Introduction
A network management system contains: several (potentially
many) nodes, each with a processing entity, termed an agent,
which has access to management instrumentation; at least one
management station; and, a management protocol, used to convey
management information between the agents and management
stations. Operations of the protocol are carried out under an
administrative framework which defines both authentication and
authorization policies.
Network management stations execute management applications
which monitor and control network elements. Network elements
are devices such as hosts, routers, terminal servers, etc.,
which are monitored and controlled through access to their
management information.
The management protocol, version 2 of the Simple Network
Management Protocol [1], may be used over a variety of
protocol suites. It is the purpose of this document to define
how the SNMPv2 maps onto an initial set of transport domains.
Other mappings may be defined in the future.
Although several mappings are defined, the mapping onto UDP is
the preferred mapping. As such, to provide for the greatest
level of interoperability, systems which choose to deploy
other mappings should also provide for proxy service to the
UDP mapping.
1.1. A Note on Terminology
For the purpose of exposition, the original Internet-standard
Network Management Framework, as described in RFCs 1155, 1157,
and 1212, is termed the SNMP version 1 framework (SNMPv1).
The current framework is termed the SNMP version 2 framework
(SNMPv2).
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 2]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
2. Definitions
SNMPv2-TM DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN
IMPORTS
snmpDomains, snmpProxys
FROM SNMPv2-SMI
TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
FROM SNMPv2-TC;
-- SNMPv2 over UDP
snmpUDPDomain OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpDomains 1 }
-- for a SnmpUDPAddress of length 6:
--
-- octets contents encoding
-- 1-4 IP-address network-byte order
-- 5-6 UDP-port network-byte order
--
SnmpUDPAddress ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
DISPLAY-HINT "1d.1d.1d.1d/2d"
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Represents a UDP address."
SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (6))
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 3]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
-- SNMPv2 over OSI
snmpCLNSDomain OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpDomains 2 }
snmpCONSDomain OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpDomains 3 }
-- for a SnmpOSIAddress of length m:
--
-- octets contents encoding
-- 1 length of NSAP "n" as an unsigned-integer
-- (either 0 or from 3 to 20)
-- 2..(n+1) NSAP concrete binary representation
-- (n+2)..m TSEL string of (up to 64) octets
--
SnmpOSIAddress ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
DISPLAY-HINT "*1x:/1x:"
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Represents an OSI transport-address."
SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (1 | 4..85))
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 4]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
-- SNMPv2 over DDP
snmpDDPDomain OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpDomains 4 }
-- for a SnmpNBPAddress of length m:
--
-- octets contents encoding
-- 1 length of object "n" as an unsigned integer
-- 2..(n+1) object string of (up to 32) octets
-- n+2 length of type "p" as an unsigned integer
-- (n+3)..(n+2+p) type string of (up to 32) octets
-- n+3+p length of zone "q" as an unsigned integer
-- (n+4+p)..m zone string of (up to 32) octets
--
-- for comparison purposes, strings are case-insensitive
--
-- all strings may contain any octet other than 255 (hex ff)
--
SnmpNBPAddress ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Represents an NBP name."
SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (3..99))
-- SNMPv2 over IPX
snmpIPXDomain OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpDomains 5 }
-- for a SnmpIPXAddress of length 12:
--
-- octets contents encoding
-- 1-4 network-number network-byte order
-- 5-10 physical-address network-byte order
-- 11-12 socket-number network-byte order
--
SnmpIPXAddress ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
DISPLAY-HINT "4x.1x:1x:1x:1x:1x:1x.2d"
STATUS current
DESCRIPTION
"Represents an IPX address."
SYNTAX OCTET STRING (SIZE (12))
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 5]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
-- for proxy to community-based SNMPv1 (RFC 1157)
rfc1157Proxy OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { snmpProxys 1 }
-- uses SnmpUDPAddress
rfc1157Domain OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { rfc1157Proxy 1 }
-- the community-based noAuth
rfc1157noAuth OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { rfc1157Proxy 2 }
END
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 6]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
3. SNMPv2 over UDP
This is the preferred transport mapping.
3.1. Serialization
Each instance of a message is serialized onto a single UDP[2]
datagram, using the algorithm specified in Section 8.
3.2. Well-known Values
Although the partyTable gives transport addressing information
for an SNMPv2 party, it is suggested that administrators
configure their SNMPv2 entities acting in an agent role to
listen on UDP port 161. Further, it is suggested that
notification sinks be configured to listen on UDP port 162.
The partyTable also lists the maximum message size which a
SNMPv2 party is willing to accept. This value must be at
least 484 octets. Implementation of larger values is
encouraged whenever possible.
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 7]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
4. SNMPv2 over OSI
This is an optional transport mapping.
4.1. Serialization
Each instance of a message is serialized onto a single TSDU
[3,4] for the OSI Connectionless-mode Transport Service
(CLTS), using the algorithm specified in Section 8.
4.2. Well-known Values
Although the partyTable gives transport addressing information
for an SNMPv2 party, it is suggested that administrators
configure their SNMPv2 entities acting in an agent role to
listen on transport selector "snmp-l" (which consists of six
ASCII characters), when using a CL-mode network service to
realize the CLTS. Further, it is suggested that notification
sinks be configured to listen on transport selector "snmpt-l"
(which consists of seven ASCII characters) when using a CL-
mode network service to realize the CLTS. Similarly, when
using a CO-mode network service to realize the CLTS, the
suggested transport selectors are "snmp-o" and "snmpt-o", for
agent and notification sink, respectively.
The partyTable also lists the maximum message size which a
SNMPv2 party is willing to accept. This value must be at
least 484 octets. Implementation of larger values is
encouraged whenever possible.
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 8]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
5. SNMPv2 over DDP
This is an optional transport mapping.
5.1. Serialization
Each instance of a message is serialized onto a single DDP
datagram [5], using the algorithm specified in Section 8.
5.2. Well-known Values
SNMPv2 messages are sent using DDP protocol type 8. SNMPv2
entities acting in an agent role listens on DDP socket number
8, whilst notification sinks listen on DDP socket number 9.
Although the partyTable gives transport addressing information
for an SNMPv2 party, administrators must configure their
SNMPv2 entities acting in an agent role to use NBP type "SNMP
Agent" (which consists of ten ASCII characters), whilst
notification sinks must be configured to use NBP type "SNMP
Trap Handler" (which consists of seventeen ASCII characters).
The NBP name for agents and notification sinks should be
stable - NBP names should not change any more often than the
IP address of a typical TCP/IP node. It is suggested that the
NBP name be stored in some form of stable storage.
The partyTable also lists the maximum message size which a
SNMPv2 party is willing to accept. This value must be at
least 484 octets. Implementation of larger values is
encouraged whenever possible.
5.3. Discussion of AppleTalk Addressing
The AppleTalk protocol suite has certain features not manifest
in the TCP/IP suite. AppleTalk's naming strategy and the
dynamic nature of address assignment can cause problems for
SNMPv2 entities that wish to manage AppleTalk networks.
TCP/IP nodes have an associated IP address which distinguishes
each from the other. In contrast, AppleTalk nodes generally
have no such characteristic. The network-level address, while
often relatively stable, can change at every reboot (or more
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 9]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
frequently).
Thus, when SNMPv2 is mapped over DDP, nodes are identified by
a "name", rather than by an "address". Hence, all AppleTalk
nodes that implement this mapping are required to respond to
NBP lookups and confirms (e.g., implement the NBP protocol
stub), which guarantees that a mapping from NBP name to DDP
address will be possible.
In determining the SNMP identity to register for an SNMPv2
entity, it is suggested that the SNMP identity be a name which
is associated with other network services offered by the
machine.
NBP lookups, which are used to map NBP names into DDP
addresses, can cause large amounts of network traffic as well
as consume CPU resources. It is also the case that the
ability to perform an NBP lookup is sensitive to certain
network disruptions (such as zone table inconsistencies) which
would not prevent direct AppleTalk communications between two
SNMPv2 entities.
Thus, it is recommended that NBP lookups be used infrequently,
primarily to create a cache of name-to-address mappings.
These cached mappings should then be used for any further SNMP
traffic. It is recommended that SNMPv2 entities acting in a
manager role should maintain this cache between reboots. This
caching can help minimize network traffic, reduce CPU load on
the network, and allow for (some amount of) network trouble
shooting when the basic name-to-address translation mechanism
is broken.
5.3.1. How to Acquire NBP names
An SNMPv2 entity acting in a manager role may have a pre-
configured list of names of "known" SNMPv2 entities acting in
an agent role. Similarly, an SNMPv2 entity acting in a
manager role might interact with an operator. Finally, an
SNMPv2 entity acting in a manager role might communicate with
all SNMPv2 entities acting in an agent role in a set of zones
or networks.
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 10]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
5.3.2. When to Turn NBP names into DDP addresses
When an SNMPv2 entity uses a cache entry to address an SNMP
packet, it should attempt to confirm the validity mapping, if
the mapping hasn't been confirmed within the last T1 seconds.
This cache entry lifetime, T1, has a minimum, default value of
60 seconds, and should be configurable.
An SNMPv2 entity acting in a manager role may decide to prime
its cache of names prior to actually communicating with
another SNMPv2 entity. In general, it is expected that such
an entity may want to keep certain mappings "more current"
than other mappings, e.g., those nodes which represent the
network infrastructure (e.g., routers) may be deemed "more
important".
Note that an SNMPv2 entity acting in a manager role should not
prime its entire cache upon initialization - rather, it should
attempt resolutions over an extended period of time (perhaps
in some pre-determined or configured priority order). Each of
these resolutions might, in fact, be a wildcard lookup in a
given zone.
An SNMPv2 entity acting in an agent role must never prime its
cache. Such an entity should do NBP lookups (or confirms)
only when it needs to send an SNMP trap. When generating a
response, such an entity does not need to confirm a cache
entry.
5.3.3. How to Turn NBP names into DDP addresses
If the only piece of information available is the NBP name,
then an NBP lookup should be performed to turn that name into
a DDP address. However, if there is a piece of stale
information, it can be used as a hint to perform an NBP
confirm (which sends a unicast to the network address which is
presumed to be the target of the name lookup) to see if the
stale information is, in fact, still valid.
An NBP name to DDP address mapping can also be confirmed
implicitly using only SNMP transactions. For example, an
SNMPv2 entity acting in a manager role issuing a retrieval
operation could also retrieve the relevant objects from the
NBP group [6] for the SNMPv2 entity acting in an agent role.
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 11]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
This information can then be correlated with the source DDP
address of the response.
5.3.4. What if NBP is broken
Under some circumstances, there may be connectivity between
two SNMPv2 entities, but the NBP mapping machinery may be
broken, e.g.,
o the NBP FwdReq (forward NBP lookup onto local attached
network) mechanism might be broken at a router on the
other entity's network; or,
o the NBP BrRq (NBP broadcast request) mechanism might be
broken at a router on the entity's own network; or,
o NBP might be broken on the other entity's node.
An SNMPv2 entity acting in a manager role which is dedicated
to AppleTalk management might choose to alleviate some of
these failures by directly implementing the router portion of
NBP. For example, such an entity might already know all the
zones on the AppleTalk internet and the networks on which each
zone appears. Given an NBP lookup which fails, the entity
could send an NBP FwdReq to the network in which the agent was
last located. If that failed, the station could then send an
NBP LkUp (NBP lookup packet) as a directed (DDP) multicast to
each network number on that network. Of the above (single)
failures, this combined approach will solve the case where
either the local router's BrRq-to-FwdReq mechanism is broken
or the remote router's FwdReq-to-LkUp mechanism is broken.
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 12]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
6. SNMPv2 over IPX
This is an optional transport mapping.
6.1. Serialization
Each instance of a message is serialized onto a single IPX
datagram [7], using the algorithm specified in Section 8.
6.2. Well-known Values
SNMPv2 messages are sent using IPX packet type 4 (i.e., Packet
Exchange Packet).
Although the partyTable gives transport addressing information
for an SNMPv2 party, it is suggested that administrators
configure their SNMPv2 entities acting in an agent role to
listen on IPX socket 36879 (900f hexadecimal). Further, it is
suggested that notification sinks be configured to listen on
IPX socket 36880 (9010 hexadecimal)
The partyTable also lists the maximum message size which a
SNMPv2 party is willing to accept. This value must be at
least 546 octets. Implementation of larger values is
encouraged whenever possible.
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 13]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
7. Proxy to SNMPv1
In order to provide proxy to community-based SNMP [8], some
definitions are necessary for both transport domains and
authentication protocols.
7.1. Transport Domain: rfc1157Domain
The transport domain, rfc1157Domain, indicates the transport
mapping for community-based SNMP messages defined in RFC 1157.
When a party's transport domain (partyTDomain) is
rfc1157Domain:
(1) the party's transport address (partyTAddress) shall be 6
octets long, the initial 4 octets containing the IP-
address in network-byte order, and the last two octets
containing the UDP port in network-byte order; and,
(2) the party's authentication protocol (partyAuthProtocol)
shall be rfc1157noAuth.
When a proxy relationship identifies a proxy destination party
which has rfc1157Domain as its transport domain:
(1) the proxy source party (contextSrcPartyIndex) and proxy
context (contextProxyContext) components of the proxy
relationship are irrelevant; and,
(2) Section 3.1 of [9] specifies the behavior of the proxy
agent.
7.2. Authentication Algorithm: rfc1157noAuth
A party's authentication protocol (partyAuthProtocol)
specifies the protocol and mechanism by which the party
authenticates the integrity and origin of the SNMPv1 or SNMPv2
PDUs it generates. When a party's authentication protocol is
rfc1157noAuth:
(1) the party's public authentication key (partyAuthPublic),
clock (partyAuthClock), and lifetime (partyAuthLifetime)
are irrelevant; and,
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 14]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
(2) the party's private authentication key
(partySecretsAuthPrivate) shall be used as the 1157
community for the proxy destination, and shall be at
least one octet in length. (No maximum length is
specified.)
Note that when setting the party's private authentication key,
the exclusive-OR semantics specified in [10] still apply.
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 15]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
8. Serialization using the Basic Encoding Rules
When the Basic Encoding Rules [11] are used for serialization:
(1) When encoding the length field, only the definite form is
used; use of the indefinite form encoding is prohibited.
Note that when using the definite-long form, it is
permissible to use more than the minimum number of length
octets necessary to encode the length field.
(2) When encoding the value field, the primitive form shall
be used for all simple types, i.e., INTEGER, OCTET
STRING, OBJECT IDENTIFIER, and BIT STRING (either
IMPLICIT or explicit). The constructed form of encoding
shall be used only for structured types, i.e., a SEQUENCE
or an IMPLICIT SEQUENCE.
(3) When a BIT STRING is serialized, all named-bits are
transferred regardless of their truth-value. Further, if
the number of named-bits is not an integral multiple of
eight, then the fewest number of additional zero-valued
bits are transferred so that an integral multiple of
eight bits is transferred.
These restrictions apply to all aspects of ASN.1 encoding,
including the message wrappers, protocol data units, and the
data objects they contain.
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 16]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
8.1. Usage Example
As an example of applying the Basic Encoding Rules, suppose
one wanted to encode an instance of the GetBulkRequest-PDU
[1]:
[5] IMPLICIT SEQUENCE {
request-id 1414684022,
non-repeaters 1,
max-repetitions 2,
variable-bindings {
{ name sysUpTime,
value { unspecified NULL } },
{ name ipNetToMediaPhysAddress,
value { unspecified NULL } },
{ name ipNetToMediaType,
value { unspecified NULL } }
}
}
Applying the BER, this would be encoded (in hexadecimal) as:
[5] IMPLICIT SEQUENCE a5 82 00 39
INTEGER 02 04 52 54 5d 76
INTEGER 02 01 01
INTEGER 02 01 02
SEQUENCE 30 2b
SEQUENCE 30 0b
OBJECT IDENTIFIER 06 07 2b 06 01 02 01 01 03
NULL 05 00
SEQUENCE 30 0d
OBJECT IDENTIFIER 06 09 2b 06 01 02 01 04 16 01 02
NULL 05 00
SEQUENCE 30 0d
OBJECT IDENTIFIER 06 09 2b 06 01 02 01 04 16 01 04
NULL 05 00
Note that the initial SEQUENCE is not encoded using the
minimum number of length octets. (The first octet of the
length, 82, indicates that the length of the content is
encoded in the next two octets.)
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 17]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
9. Acknowledgements
The UDP-based mapping is based, in part, on RFC 1157.
The OSI-based mapping is based, in part, on RFC 1283.
The DDP-based mapping is based, in part, on earlier work by
Greg Minshall of Novell, Inc., and Mike Ritter of Apple
Computer, Inc.
The IPX-based mapping is based, in part, on RFC 1298.
The section on proxy to community-based SNMP is based on
earlier work that was based in part on a suggestion by
Jonathan Biggar of Netlabs, Inc.
Finally, the comments of the SNMP version 2 working group are
gratefully acknowledged:
Beth Adams, Network Management Forum
Steve Alexander, INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation
David Arneson, Cabletron Systems
Toshiya Asaba
Fred Baker, ACC
Jim Barnes, Xylogics, Inc.
Brian Bataille
Andy Bierman, SynOptics Communications, Inc.
Uri Blumenthal, IBM Corporation
Fred Bohle, Interlink
Jack Brown
Theodore Brunner, Bellcore
Stephen F. Bush, GE Information Services
Jeffrey D. Case, University of Tennessee, Knoxville
John Chang, IBM Corporation
Szusin Chen, Sun Microsystems
Robert Ching
Chris Chiotasso, Ungermann-Bass
Bobby A. Clay, NASA/Boeing
John Cooke, Chipcom
Tracy Cox, Bellcore
Juan Cruz, Datability, Inc.
David Cullerot, Cabletron Systems
Cathy Cunningham, Microcom
James R. (Chuck) Davin, Bellcore
Michael Davis, Clearpoint
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 18]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
Mike Davison, FiberCom
Cynthia DellaTorre, MITRE
Taso N. Devetzis, Bellcore
Manual Diaz, DAVID Systems, Inc.
Jon Dreyer, Sun Microsystems
David Engel, Optical Data Systems
Mike Erlinger, Lexcel
Roger Fajman, NIH
Daniel Fauvarque, Sun Microsystems
Karen Frisa, CMU
Shari Galitzer, MITRE
Shawn Gallagher, Digital Equipment Corporation
Richard Graveman, Bellcore
Maria Greene, Xyplex, Inc.
Michel Guittet, Apple
Robert Gutierrez, NASA
Bill Hagerty, Cabletron Systems
Gary W. Haney, Martin Marietta Energy Systems
Patrick Hanil, Nokia Telecommunications
Matt Hecht, SNMP Research, Inc.
Edward A. Heiner, Jr., Synernetics Inc.
Susan E. Hicks, Martin Marietta Energy Systems
Geral Holzhauer, Apple
John Hopprich, DAVID Systems, Inc.
Jeff Hughes, Hewlett-Packard
Robin Iddon, Axon Networks, Inc.
David Itusak
Kevin M. Jackson, Concord Communications, Inc.
Ole J. Jacobsen, Interop Company
Ronald Jacoby, Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Satish Joshi, SynOptics Communications, Inc.
Frank Kastenholz, FTP Software
Mark Kepke, Hewlett-Packard
Ken Key, SNMP Research, Inc.
Zbiginew Kielczewski, Eicon
Jongyeoi Kim
Andrew Knutsen, The Santa Cruz Operation
Michael L. Kornegay, VisiSoft
Deirdre C. Kostik, Bellcore
Cheryl Krupczak, Georgia Tech
Mark S. Lewis, Telebit
David Lin
David Lindemulder, AT&T/NCR
Ben Lisowski, Sprint
David Liu, Bell-Northern Research
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 19]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
John Lunny, The Wollongong Group
Robert C. Lushbaugh Martin, Marietta Energy Systems
Michael Luufer, BBN
Carl Madison, Star-Tek, Inc.
Keith McCloghrie, Hughes LAN Systems
Evan McGinnis, 3Com Corporation
Bill McKenzie, IBM Corporation
Donna McMaster, SynOptics Communications, Inc.
John Medicke, IBM Corporation
Doug Miller, Telebit
Dave Minnich, FiberCom
Mohammad Mirhakkak, MITRE
Rohit Mital, Protools
George Mouradian, AT&T Bell Labs
Patrick Mullaney, Cabletron Systems
Dan Myers, 3Com Corporation
Rina Nathaniel, Rad Network Devices Ltd.
Hien V. Nguyen, Sprint
Mo Nikain
Tom Nisbet
William B. Norton, MERIT
Steve Onishi, Wellfleet Communications, Inc.
David T. Perkins, SynOptics Communications, Inc.
Carl Powell, BBN
Ilan Raab, SynOptics Communications, Inc.
Richard Ramons, AT&T
Venkat D. Rangan, Metric Network Systems, Inc.
Louise Reingold, Sprint
Sam Roberts, Farallon Computing, Inc.
Kary Robertson, Concord Communications, Inc.
Dan Romascanu, Lannet Data Communications Ltd.
Marshall T. Rose, Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.
Shawn A. Routhier, Epilogue Technology Corporation
Chris Rozman
Asaf Rubissa, Fibronics
Jon Saperia, Digital Equipment Corporation
Michael Sapich
Mike Scanlon, Interlan
Sam Schaen, MITRE
John Seligson, Ultra Network Technologies
Paul A. Serice, Corporation for Open Systems
Chris Shaw, Banyan Systems
Timon Sloane
Robert Snyder, Cisco Systems
Joo Young Song
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 20]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
Roy Spitier, Sprint
Einar Stefferud, Network Management Associates
John Stephens, Cayman Systems, Inc.
Robert L. Stewart, Xyplex, Inc. (chair)
Kaj Tesink, Bellcore
Dean Throop, Data General
Ahmet Tuncay, France Telecom-CNET
Maurice Turcotte, Racal Datacom
Warren Vik, INTERACTIVE Systems Corporation
Yannis Viniotis
Steven L. Waldbusser, Carnegie Mellon Universitty
Timothy M. Walden, ACC
Alice Wang, Sun Microsystems
James Watt, Newbridge
Luanne Waul, Timeplex
Donald E. Westlake III, Digital Equipment Corporation
Gerry White
Bert Wijnen, IBM Corporation
Peter Wilson, 3Com Corporation
Steven Wong, Digital Equipment Corporation
Randy Worzella, IBM Corporation
Daniel Woycke, MITRE
Honda Wu
Jeff Yarnell, Protools
Chris Young, Cabletron
Kiho Yum, 3Com Corporation
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 21]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
10. References
[1] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M., and Waldbusser, S.,
"Protocol Operations for version 2 of the Simple Network
Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1448, SNMP Research,
Inc., Hughes LAN Systems, Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.,
Carnegie Mellon University, April 1993.
[2] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768,
USC/Information Sciences Institute, August 1980.
[3] Information processing systems - Open Systems
Interconnection - Transport Service Definition,
International Organization for Standardization.
International Standard 8072, (June, 1986).
[4] Information processing systems - Open Systems
Interconnection - Transport Service Definition - Addendum
1: Connectionless-mode Transmission, International
Organization for Standardization. International Standard
8072/AD 1, (December, 1986).
[5] G. Sidhu, R. Andrews, A. Oppenheimer, Inside AppleTalk
(second edition). Addison-Wesley, 1990.
[6] Waldbusser, S., "AppleTalk Management Information Base",
RFC 1243, Carnegie Mellon University, July 1991.
[7] Network System Technical Interface Overview. Novell,
Inc, (June, 1989).
[8] Case, J., Fedor, M., Schoffstall, M., Davin, J., "Simple
Network Management Protocol", STD 15, RFC 1157, SNMP
Research, Performance Systems International, MIT
Laboratory for Computer Science, May 1990.
[9] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M., and Waldbusser, S.,
"Coexistence between version 1 and version 2 of the
Internet-standard Network Management Framework", RFC
1452, SNMP Research, Inc., Hughes LAN Systems, Dover
Beach Consulting, Inc., Carnegie Mellon University, April
1993.
[10] McCloghrie, K., and Galvin, J., "Party MIB for version 2
of the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 22]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
1447, Hughes LAN Systems, Trusted Information Systems,
April 1993.
[11] Information processing systems - Open Systems
Interconnection - Specification of Basic Encoding Rules
for Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1), International
Organization for Standardization. International Standard
8825, (December, 1987).
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 23]
RFC 1449 Transport Mappings for SNMPv2 April 1993
11. Security Considerations
Security issues are not discussed in this memo.
12. Authors' Addresses
Jeffrey D. Case
SNMP Research, Inc.
3001 Kimberlin Heights Rd.
Knoxville, TN 37920-9716
US
Phone: +1 615 573 1434
Email: case@snmp.com
Keith McCloghrie
Hughes LAN Systems
1225 Charleston Road
Mountain View, CA 94043
US
Phone: +1 415 966 7934
Email: kzm@hls.com
Marshall T. Rose
Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.
420 Whisman Court
Mountain View, CA 94043-2186
US
Phone: +1 415 968 1052
Email: mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us
Steven Waldbusser
Carnegie Mellon University
4910 Forbes Ave
Pittsburgh, PA 15213
US
Phone: +1 412 268 6628
Email: waldbusser@cmu.edu
Case, McCloghrie, Rose & Waldbusser [Page 24]