Skip to main content

A SNMP MIB to manage black-link optical interface parameters of DWDM applications
draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01

The information below is for an old version of the document.
Document Type
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Expired".
Author Ruediger Kunze
Last updated 2011-10-31 (Latest revision 2011-07-01)
RFC stream (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01
Internet Engineering Task Force                   GMG. G.Galimberti, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                     Cisco
Intended status: Standards Track                        RK. R.Kunze, Ed.
Expires: May 3, 2012                                    Deutsche Telekom
                                                       Kam. Kam Lam, Ed.
                                                          Alcatel-Lucent
                                                        October 31, 2011

 A SNMP MIB to manage black-link optical  interface parameters of DWDM
                              applications
                draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01

Abstract

   This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
   used by Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) in TCP/IP- based
   internets.  In particular, it defines objects for managing Optical
   parameters associated with Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM)
   systems or characterized by the Optical Transport Network (OTN) in
   accordance with the Black-Link approach defined in ITU-T
   Recommendation G.698.2.  [ITU.G698.2]

   The MIB module defined in this memo can be used for Optical
   Parameters monitoring and/or configuration of the endpoints of Black
   Links.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 3, 2012.

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   2.  The Internet-Standard Management Framework . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.  Conventions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     4.1.  Optical Parameters Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       4.1.1.  General  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       4.1.2.  Parameters at Ss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       4.1.3.  Optical path from point Ss to Rs . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       4.1.4.  Interface at point Rs  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
       4.1.5.  Alarms and Threshold definition  . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       4.1.6.  Performance Monitoring (PM) description  . . . . . . . 12
       4.1.7.  Generic Parameter description  . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
     4.2.  Use of ifTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       4.2.1.  Use of ifTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       4.2.2.  Use of ifTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       4.2.3.  Use of ifTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   5.  Structure of the MIB Module  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   6.  Object Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   7.  Relationship to Other MIB Modules  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
     7.1.  Relationship to the [TEMPLATE TODO] MIB  . . . . . . . . . 15
     7.2.  MIB modules required for IMPORTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   8.  Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   9.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   10. IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   11. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
   12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
     12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
     12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
   Appendix A.  Change Log  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
   Appendix B.  Open Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                  [Page 2]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                  [Page 3]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

1.  Introduction

   This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
   used by Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) in TCP/IP- based
   internets.  In particular, it defines objects for managing Optical
   parameters associated with Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM)
   systems or characterized by the Optical Transport Network (OTN) in
   accordance with the Black-Link approach defined in G.698.2
   [ITU.G698.2]

   Black Link approach allows supporting an optical transmitter/receiver
   pair of one vendor to inject a DWDM channel and run it over an
   optical network composed of amplifiers, filters, add-drop
   multiplexers from a different vendor.  From architectural point of
   view, the "Black Link" is a set of pre-configured/qualified network
   connections between the G.698.2 reference points S and R. The black
   links will be managed at the edges (i.e. the transmitters and
   receivers attached to the S and R reference points respectively) for
   the relevant parameters specified in G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2], G.798
   [ITU.G798], G.874 [ITU.G874], and the performance parameters
   specified G.7710/Y.1701 [ITU-T G.7710] and and G.874.1 [ITU.G874.1].

   The G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] provides optical parameter values for
   physical layer interfaces of Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing
   (DWDM) systems primarily intended for metro applications which
   include optical amplifiers.  Applications are defined in G.698.2
   [ITU.G698.2] using optical interface parameters at the single-channel
   connection points between optical transmitters and the optical
   multiplexer, as well as between optical receivers and the optical
   demultiplexer in the DWDM system.  This Recommendation uses a
   methodology which does not specify the details of the optical link,
   e.g. the maximum fibre length, explicitly.  The Recommendation
   currently includes unidirectional DWDM applications at 2.5 and 10
   Gbit/s (with 100 GHz and 50 GHz channel frequency spacing).  Work is
   still underway for 40 and 100 Gbit/s interfaces.  There is
   possibility for extensions to a lower channel frequency spacing.

   This draft refers and supports also the
   draft-kunze-g698-mgnt-ctrl-framework.

   The building of a SNMP MIB describing the optical parameters defined
   in G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] G.798 [ITU.G798], G.874 [ITU.G874],
   parameters specified G.7710/Y.1701 [ITU-T G.7710] allows the
   different vendors and operator to retrieve, provision and exchange
   information related to Optical blak links in a standardized way.
   This facilitates interworking in case of using optical interfaces
   from different vendors at the end of the link.  The MIB, reporting
   the Optical parameters and their values, characterizes the features

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                  [Page 4]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   and the performances of the optical components and allow a reliable
   black link design in case of multivendor optical networks.

   Although RFC 3591 [RFC3591] describes and defines the SNMP MIB of a
   number of key optical parameters, alarms and Performance Monitoring,
   a more complete description of optical parameters and processes can
   be found in the ITU-T Recommendations.  Appendix A of this document
   provides an overview about the extensive ITU-T documentation in this
   area.  The same considerations can be applied to the RFC 4054
   [RFC4054]

2.  The Internet-Standard Management Framework

   For a detailed overview of the documents that describe the current
   Internet-Standard Management Framework, please refer to section 7 of
   RFC 3410 [RFC3410].

   Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed
   the Management Information Base or MIB.  MIB objects are generally
   accessed through the Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP).
   Objects in the MIB are defined using the mechanisms defined in the
   Structure of Management Information (SMI).  This memo specifies a MIB
   module that is compliant to the SMIv2, which is described in STD 58,
   RFC 2578 [RFC2578], STD 58, RFC 2579 [RFC2579] and STD 58, RFC 2580
   [RFC2580].

3.  Conventions

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119] In
   the description of OIDs the convention: Set (S) Get (G) and Trap (T)
   conventions will describe the action allowed by the paramenter.

4.  Overview

   In this document, the term OTN (Optical Transport Network) system is
   used to describe devices that are compliant with the requirements
   specified in the ITU-T Recommendations G.872 [ITU.G872], G.709
   [ITU.G709] , G.798 [ITU.G798], G.874 [ITU.G874], and G.874.1
   [ITU.G874.1] while refers to G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] for the Black Link
   and DWDM parameter description.

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                  [Page 5]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   Figure 1 shows a set of reference points, for the linear "black-link"
   approach, for single-channel connection (Ss and Rs) between
   transmitters (Tx) and receivers (Rx).  Here the DWDM network elements
   include an OM and an OD (which are used as a pair with the opposing
   element), one or more optical amplifiers and may also include one or
   more OADMs.

           +-------------------------------------------------+
       Ss  |              DWDM Network Elements              | Rs
  +---+ |  |  | \                                       / |  |  | +---+
  Tx L1----|->|   \    +------+            +------+   /   |--|--->Rx L1
  +---+    |  |    |   |      |  +------+  |      |  |    |  |    +---+
  +---+    |  |    |   |      |  |      |  |      |  |    |  |    +---+
  Tx L2----|->| OM |-->|------|->| OADM |--|------|->| OD |--|--->Rx L2
  +---+    |  |    |   |      |  |      |  |      |  |    |  |    +---+
  +---+    |  |    |   |      |  +------+  |      |  |    |  |    +---+
  Tx L3----|->|   /    | DWDM |    |  ^    | DWDM |   \   |--|--->Rx L3
  +---+    |  | /      | Link +----|--|----+ Link |     \ |  |    +---+
           +-----------+           |  |           +----------+
                                +--+  +--+
                                |        |
                                v        |
                             +-----+  +-----+
                             |RxLx |  |TxLx |
                             +-----+  +-----+
       Ss = reference point at the DWDM network element tributary output
       Rs = reference point at the DWDM network element tributary input
       Lx = Lambda x
       OM = Optical Mux
       OD = Optical Demux
       OADM = Optical Add Drop Mux

   from Fig. 5.1/G.698.2

                        Figure 1: Linear Black Link

   G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] defines also Ring Black Link configurations
   [Fig. 5.2/G.698.2] and Bidiractional Black Link configurations [Fig.
   5.3/G.698.2]

4.1.  Optical Parameters Description

   The black links are managed at the edges, i.e. at the transmitters
   (Tx) and receivers (Rx) attached to the S and R reference points
   respectively.  The parameters that could be managed at the black link
   edges are specified in G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] for the optical

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                  [Page 6]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   interface, in G.798 [ITU.G798] for the equipment aspect, and in
   G.7710/Y.1701 [ITU.G7710] and G.874 [ITU.G874] for fault management
   and performance monitoring.

   The definitions of the optical parameters are provided below to
   increase the readability of the document, where the definition is
   ended by (G) the parameter can be retrieve with a GET, when (S) it
   can be provisioned by a SET, (G,S) can be either GET and SET.

   To support the management of these parameters, the SNMP MIB in RFC
   3591 [RFC3591] is extended with a new MIB module defined in section
   56 of this document.  This new MIB module includes the definition of
   XXX, which represents the parameters at Tx (S) and Rx (R).

   Editor Note: Yet to be decided, XXX could be OChr configuration and
   monitoring tables.

4.1.1.  General

   The following general parameters from G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] and
   G.694.1 [ITU.G694.1] provide general information at the optical
   interface reference points.

   Minimum channel spacing:
      This is the minimum nominal difference in frequency (in GHz)
      between two adjacent channels (G).

   Bit rate/line coding of optical tributary signals:
      Optical tributary signal class NRZ 2.5G (from nominally 622 Mbit/s
      to nominally 2.67 Gbit/s) or NRZ 10G nominally 2.4 Gbit/s to
      nominally 10.71 Gbit/s. (nominally 2.4 Gbit/s to nominally 10.71
      Gbit/s). 40Gbit/s and 100Gbit/s are under study (G, S).

   FEC Coding:
      This parameter indicate what Forward Error Correction (FEC) code
      is used at Ss and Rs (G, S) (not mentioned in G.698).  EDITOR
      NOTE: Need to check whether this parameter is to be put in "vendor
      specific" parameter or can be a standard paramenter as defined in
      G.698.2.  Is this the various adaptations (FEC encoding types)
      specified in G.798 clauses 12.3.1.1 (with FEC), 12.3.1.2 (without
      FEC), and 12.3.1.5 (vender-specific FEC) .

   Maximum bit error ratio (BER):
      This parameter indicate the maximum Bit error rate can be
      supported by the application at the Receiver.  In case of FEC
      applications it is intended after the FEC correction (G) .

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                  [Page 7]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   Fiber type:
      Fiber type as per fibre types are chosen from those defined in
      ITU-T Recs G.652, G.653, and G.655 (G,S) .

   Wavelength Range (see G.694.1):  [ITU.G694.1]
      This parameter indicate minimum and maximum wavelength spectrum
      (G) in a definite wavelength Band (L, C and S).

   Wavelength Value (see G.694.1):
      This parameter indicates the wavelength value that Ss and Rs will
      be set to work (G, S).

   Vendor Transceiver Class:
      Other than specifying all the Transceiver parameter, it might be
      convenient for the vendors to summarize a set of parameters in a
      single proprietary parameter: the Class of transceiver.  The
      Transceiver classification will be based on the Vendor Name and
      the main TX and RX parameters (i.e.  Trunk Mode, Framing, Bit
      rate, Trunk Type, Channel Band, Channel Grid, Modulation Format,
      Channel Modulation Format, FEC Coding, Electrical Signal Framing
      at Tx, Minimum maximum Chromatic Disperion (CD) at Rx, Maximum
      Polarization Mode Dispersion (PMD) at Rx, Maximum differential
      group delay at Rx, Loopbacks, TDC, Pre-FEC BER, Q-factor,
      Q-margin,etc.).  If this parameter is used, the MIB parameters
      specifying the Transceiver characteristics may not be significant
      and the vendor will be responsible to specify the Class contents
      and values.  The Vendor can publish the parameters of its Classes
      or declare to be compatible with published Classes.(G) Optional
      for compliance. (not mentioned in G.698)

   single-channel application codes (see G.698.2):
      This parameter indicates the transceiver application code at Ss
      and Rs as defined in [ITU.G698.2] Chapter 5.3 - this parameter can
      be called Optical Interface Identifier OII as per
      [draft-martinelli-wson-interface-class] (G, S).

4.1.2.  Parameters at Ss

   The following parameters for the interface at point S are defined in
   G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2].

   Maximum and minimum mean channel output power:
      The mean launched power at Ss is the average power (in dBm) of a
      pseudo-random data sequence coupled into the DWDM link.  It is
      defined as the rhange (Max and Min ) of the parameter (G, S)

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                  [Page 8]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   Minimum and maximum central frequency:
      The central frequency is the nominal single-channel frequency (in
      THz) on which the digital coded information of the particular
      optical channel is modulated by use of the NRZ line code.  The
      central frequencies of all channels within an application lie on
      the frequency grid for the minimum channel spacing of the
      application given in ITU-T Rec. G.694.1.  This parameter give the
      Maximum and minimum frequency interval the channel must be
      modulated (G)

   Maximum spectral excursion:
      This is the maximum acceptable difference between the nominal
      central frequency (in GHz) of the channel and the minus 15 dB
      points of the transmitter spectrum furthest from the nominal
      central frequency measured at point Ss.  (G)

   Maximum transmitter (residual) dispersion OSNR penalty (B.3/G.959.1)
      [ITU.G959.1]
      Defines a reference receiver that this penalty is measured with.
      Lowest OSNR at Ss with worst case (residual) dispersion minus the
      Lowest OSNR at Ss with no dispersion.  Lowest OSNR at Ss with no
      dispersion (G)

   Minimum side mode suppression ratio, Minimum channel extinction
   ratio, Eye mask:
      Although are defined in G.698.2 are not supported by this draft.

4.1.3.  Optical path from point Ss to Rs

   The following parameters for the optical path from point S and R are
   defined in G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2].

   Maximum and minimum (residual) chromatic dispersion:
      These parameters define the maximum and minimum value of the
      optical path "end to end chromatic dispersion" (in ps/nm) that the
      system shall be able to tolerate.  (G)

   Minimum optical return loss at Ss:
      These parameter defines minimum optical return loss (in dB) of the
      cable plant at the source reference point (Ss), including any
      connectors (G)

   Maximum discrete reflectance between SS and RS:
      Optical reflectance is defined to be the ratio of the reflected
      optical power present at a point, to the optical power incident to
      that point.  Control of reflections is discussed extensively in
      ITU-T Rec. G.957 (G)

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                  [Page 9]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   Maximum differential group delay:
      Differential group delay (DGD) is the time difference between the
      fractions of a pulse that are transmitted in the two principal
      states of polarization of an optical signal.  For distances
      greater than several kilometres, and assuming random (strong)
      polarization mode coupling, DGD in a fibre can be statistically
      modelled as having a Maxwellian distribution.  (G)

   Maximum polarisation dependent loss:
      The polarisation dependent loss (PDL) is the difference (in dB)
      between the maximum and minimum values of the channel insertion
      loss (or gain) of the black-link from point SS to RS due to a
      variation of the state of polarization (SOP) over all SOPs.  (G)

   Maximum inter-channel crosstalk:
      Inter-channel crosstalk is defined as the ratio of total power in
      all of the disturbing channels to that in the wanted channel,
      where the wanted and disturbing channels are at different
      wavelengths.  The parameter specify the isolation of a link
      conforming to the "black-link" approach such that under the worst-
      case operating conditions the inter-channel crosstalk at any
      reference point RS is less than the maximum inter-channel
      crosstalk value (G)

   Maximum interferometric crosstalk:
      This parameter places a requirement on the isolation of a link
      conforming to the "black-link" approach such that under the worst
      case operating conditions the interferometric crosstalk at any
      reference point RS is less than the maximum interferometric
      crosstalk value.  (G)

   Maximum optical path OSNR penalty:
      The optical path OSNR penalty is defined as the difference between
      the Lowest OSNR at Rs and Lowest OSNR at Ss that meets the BER
      requirement (G)

   Maximum ripple:
      Although is defined in G.698.2, this parameter is not supported by
      this draft.

4.1.4.  Interface at point Rs

   The following parameters for the interface at point R are defined in
   G.698.2.

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   Maximum and minimum mean input power:
      The maximum and minimum values of the average received power (in
      dBm) at point Rs.  (G)

   Minimum optical signal-to-noise ratio (OSNR):
      The minimum optical signal-to-noise ratio (OSNR) is the minimum
      value of the ratio of the signal power in the wanted channel to
      the highest noise power density in the range of the central
      frequency plus and minus the maximum spectral excursion (G)

   Receiver OSNR tolerance:
      The receiver OSNR tolerance is defined as the minimum value of
      OSNR at point Rs that can be tolerated while maintaining the
      maximum BER of the application.  (G)

   Maximum reflectance at receiver:
      Although is defined in G.698.2, this parameter is not supported by
      this draft.

4.1.5.  Alarms and Threshold definition

   This section describes the Alarms and the Thresholds at Ss and Rs
   points according to ITU-T Recommendations G.798 [ITU.G798], G.874
   [ITU.G874], and G.874.1 [ITU.G874.1].

   OTN alarms defined in RFC3591:

      Threshold Crossing Alert (TCA Alarm)

      LOW-TXPOWER

      HIGH-TXPOWER

      LOW-RXPOWER

      HIGH-RXPOWER

      Loss of Signal (LOS)

      Loss of Frame (LOF)

      Server Signal Failure-P (SSF-P)

      Loss of Multiframe (LOM)

   OTN Thresholds (for TCA) defined in RFC3591

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

      LOW-TXPOWER

      HIGH-TXPOWER

      LOW-RXPOWER

      HIGH-RXPOWER

   As the above parameters/alarms are already defined in RFC3591, they
   are out of scope of this document and the RFC3591 will continue to be
   the only reference for them

   The list below reports the new Alarms and Thresholds not managed in
   RFC3591

4.1.6.  Performance Monitoring (PM) description

   This section describes the Performance Monitoring parameters and
   their thresholds at Ss and Rs points (Near -End and Far-End)according
   to ITU-T Recommendations G.826 [ITU.G826], G.8201 [ITU.G8201], G.709
   [ITU.G709], G.798 [ITU.G798], G.874 [ITU.G874], and G.874.1
   [ITU.G874.1].

   EDITOR NOTE: The list of PM parameters in this section needs to be
   revised.  Should only include those PM parameters resulted from the
   defects and PM primitives specified in G.798 clauses 12.2.2 and
   12.3.1.

   Failure Counts (fc) :
      Number of Failures occurred in an observation periond (G)

   Errored Seconds  (es) :
      It is a one-second period in which one or more bits are in error
      or during which Loss of Signal (LOS) or Alarm Indication Signal
      (AIS) is detected (G)

   Severely Errored Seconds  (ses) :
      It is a one-second period which has a bit-error ratio =
      1x10Eminus3 or during which Loss of Signal (LOS) or Alarm
      Indication Signal (AIS) is detected (G)

   Unavailable Seconds  (uas) :
      A period of unavailable time begins at the onset of ten
      consecutive SES events.  These ten seconds are considered to be
      part of unavailable time.  A new period of available time begins
      at the onset of ten consecutive non-SES events.  These ten seconds
      are considered to be part of available time (G)

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   Background Block Errors  (bbe) :
      An errored block not occurring as part of an SES(G)

   Error Seconds Ratio  (esr) :
      The ratio of ES in available time to total seconds in available
      time during a fixed measurement interval(G)

   Severely Errored Seconds Ratio  (sesr) :
      The ratio of SES in available time to total seconds in available
      time during a fixed measurement interval(G)

   Background Block Errored Seconds Ratio  (bber) :
      The ratio of Background Block Errors (BBE) to total blocks in
      available time during a fixed measurement interval.  The count of
      total blocks excludes all blocks during SESs.(G)

   FEC corrected Bit Error (FECcorrErr):
      The number of bits corrected by the FEC are counted over one
      second (G)

   FEC un-corrected Bit Error :
      The number of bits un-corrected by the FEC are counted over one
      second (G)

   Pre-FEC Bit Error :
      The number of Errored bits at receiving side before the FEC
      function counted over one second (G)

   OTN Valid Intervals :
      The number of contiguous 15 minute intervals for which valid OTN
      performance monitoring data is available for the particular
      interface (G)

   FEC Valid Intervals  :
      The number of contiguous 15 minute intervals for which valid FEC
      PM data is available for the particular interface.(G)

4.1.7.  Generic Parameter description

   This section describes the Generic Parameters at Ss and Rs points
   according to ITU-T Recommendations G.872 [ITU.G872], G.709
   [ITU.G709], G.798 [ITU.G798], G.874 [ITU.G874], and G.874.1
   [ITU.G874.1].

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   Interface Admin Status :
      The Administrative Status of an Interface: Up/Down - In Service/
      Out of Service (can be Automatic in Service) (G/S)

   Interface Operational Status :
      The Operational Status of an Interface: Up/Down - In Service/Out
      of Service (G)

4.2.  Use of ifTable

   This section specifies how the MIB II interfaces group, as defined in
   RFC 2863 [RFC2863], is used for the link ends of a black link.  Only
   the ifGeneralInformationGroup will be supported for the ifTable and
   the ifStackTable to maintain the relationship between the OChr and
   OPS layers.  The OChr and OPS layers are managed in the ifTable using
   IfEntries that correlate to the layers depicted in Figure T.B.D. For
   example, a device with TX and/or RX will have an Optical Physical
   Section (OPS) layer, and an Optical Channel with reduced
   functionality (OChr) layer.  There is a one to one relationship
   between the OPS and OChr layers.

   EDITOR NOTE: more to be provided

4.2.1.  Use of ifTable

   Use of ifTable for OPS Layer

4.2.2.  Use of ifTable

   Use of ifTable for OChr Layer

4.2.3.  Use of ifTable

   Use of ifStackTable

5.  Structure of the MIB Module

   EDITOR NOTE:text will be provided based on the MIB module in Section
   6

6.  Object Definitions

   EDITOR NOTE: Once the scope in Section 1 and the parameters in
   Section 4 are finalized, a MIB module will be defined.  It could be
   an extension to the OPT-IF-MIB module of RFC 3591. >>>

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   OPT-IF-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN

   IMPORTS
           MODULE-IDENTITY, OBJECT-TYPE, Gauge32, Integer32,
             Unsigned32, transmission
                   FROM SNMPv2-SMI
           TEXTUAL-CONVENTION, RowPointer, RowStatus, TruthValue
                   FROM SNMPv2-TC
           SnmpAdminString
                   FROM SNMP-FRAMEWORK-MIB
           MODULE-COMPLIANCE, OBJECT-GROUP
                   FROM SNMPv2-CONF
           ifIndex
                   FROM IF-MIB;

--  This is the MIB module for the optical parameters associated with the
    black link end points.

7.  Relationship to Other MIB Modules

7.1.  Relationship to the [TEMPLATE TODO] MIB

7.2.  MIB modules required for IMPORTS

8.  Definitions

   [TEMPLATE TODO]: put your valid MIB module here.
   A list of tools that can help automate the process of
   checking MIB definitions can be found at
   http://www.ops.ietf.org/mib-review-tools.html

9.  Security Considerations

   There are a number of management objects defined in this MIB module
   with a MAX-ACCESS clause of read-write and/or read-create.  Such
   objects may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network
   environments.  The support for SET operations in a non-secure
   environment without proper protection can have a negative effect on
   network operations.  These are the tables and objects and their
   sensitivity/vulnerability:

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   o

   There are no management objects defined in this MIB module that have
   a MAX-ACCESS clause of read-write and/or read-create.  So, if this
   MIB module is implemented correctly, then there is no risk that an
   intruder can alter or create any management objects of this MIB
   module via direct SNMP SET operations.

   Some of the readable objects in this MIB module (i.e., objects with a
   MAX-ACCESS other than not-accessible) may be considered sensitive or
   vulnerable in some network environments.  It is thus important to
   control even GET and/or NOTIFY access to these objects and possibly
   to even encrypt the values of these objects when sending them over
   the network via SNMP.

   SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 did not include adequate security.
   Even if the network itself is secure (for example by using IPsec),
   even then, there is no control as to who on the secure network is
   allowed to access and GET/SET (read/change/create/delete) the objects
   in this MIB module.

   It is RECOMMENDED that implementers consider the security features as
   provided by the SNMPv3 framework (see [RFC3410], section 8),
   including full support for the SNMPv3 cryptographic mechanisms (for
   authentication and privacy).

   Further, deployment of SNMP versions prior to SNMPv3 is NOT
   RECOMMENDED.  Instead, it is RECOMMENDED to deploy SNMPv3 and to
   enable cryptographic security.  It is then a customer/operator
   responsibility to ensure that the SNMP entity giving access to an
   instance of this MIB module is properly configured to give access to
   the objects only to those principals (users) that have legitimate
   rights to indeed GET or SET (change/create/delete) them.

10.  IANA Considerations

   Option #1:

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

        The MIB module in this document uses the following IANA-assigned
        OBJECT IDENTIFIER values recorded in the SMI Numbers registry:

        Descriptor        OBJECT IDENTIFIER value
        ----------        -----------------------

        sampleMIB  { mib-2 XXX }

   Option #2:

   Editor's Note (to be removed prior to publication): the IANA is
   requested to assign a value for "XXX" under the 'mib-2' subtree and
   to record the assignment in the SMI Numbers registry.  When the
   assignment has been made, the RFC Editor is asked to replace "XXX"
   (here and in the MIB module) with the assigned value and to remove
   this note.

   Note well: prior to official assignment by the IANA, an internet
   draft MUST use placeholders (such as "XXX" above) rather than actual
   numbers.  See RFC4181 Section 4.5 for an example of how this is done
   in an internet draft MIB module.

   Option #3:

   This memo includes no request to IANA.

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

11.  Contributors

               Arnold Mattheus
                 Deutsche Telekom
                 Darmstadt
                 Germany
                 email a.mattheus@telekom.de

               Manuel Paul
                 Deutsche Telekom
                 Berlin
                 Germany
                 email Manuel.Paul@telekom.de

               Frank Luennemann
                 Deutsche Telekom
                 Munster
                 Germany
                 email Frank.Luennemann@telekom.de

               Najam Saquib
                 Cisco
                 Ludwig-Erhard-Strasse 3
                 ESCHBORN, HESSEN 65760
                 GERMANY
                 email nasaquib@cisco.com

               Walid Wakim
                 Cisco
                 9501 Technology Blvd
                 ROSEMONT, ILLINOIS 60018
                 UNITED STATES
                 email wwakim@cisco.com

               Ori Gerstel
                 Cisco
                 32 HaMelacha St., (HaSharon Bldg)
                 SOUTH NETANYA, HAMERKAZ 42504
                 ISRAEL
                 email ogerstel@cisco.com

12.  References

12.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2863]  McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group
              MIB", RFC 2863, June 2000.

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2578]  McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J.
              Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Structure of Management Information
              Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April 1999.

   [RFC2579]  McCloghrie, K., Ed., Perkins, D., Ed., and J.
              Schoenwaelder, Ed., "Textual Conventions for SMIv2",
              STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999.

   [RFC2580]  McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., and J. Schoenwaelder,
              "Conformance Statements for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580,
              April 1999.

   [RFC3591]  Lam, H-K., Stewart, M., and A. Huynh, "Definitions of
              Managed Objects for the Optical Interface Type", RFC 3591,
              September 2003.

   [ITU.G698.2]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Amplified
              multichannel dense wavelength division multiplexing
              applications with single channel optical interfaces", ITU-
              T Recommendation G.698.2, November 2009.

   [ITU.G709]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Interface for the
              Optical Transport Network (OTN)", ITU-T Recommendation
              G.709, March 2003.

   [ITU.G872]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Architecture of
              optical transport networks", ITU-T Recommendation G.872,
              November 2001.

   [ITU.G798]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Characteristics
              of optical transport network hierarchy equipment
              functional blocks", ITU-T Recommendation G.798,
              October 2010.

   [ITU.G874]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Management
              aspects of optical transport network elements", ITU-
              T Recommendation G.874, July 2010.

   [ITU.G874.1]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Optical transport

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 19]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

              network (OTN): Protocol-neutral management information
              model for the network element view", ITU-T Recommendation
              G.874.1, January 2002.

   [ITU.G959.1]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Optical transport
              network physical layer interfaces", ITU-T Recommendation
              G.959.1, November 2009.

   [ITU.G826]
              International Telecommunications Union, "End-to-end error
              performance parameters and objectives for international,
              constant bit-rate digital paths and connections", ITU-
              T Recommendation G.826, November 2009.

   [ITU.G8201]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Error performance
              parameters and objectives for multi-operator international
              paths within the Optical Transport Network (OTN)", ITU-
              T Recommendation G.8201, September 2003.

   [ITU.G694.1]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Spectral grids
              for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid", ITU-
              T Recommendation G.694.1, June 2002.

   [ITU.G7710]
              International Telecommunications Union, "Common equipment
              management function requirements", ITU-T Recommendation
              G.7710, May 2008.

12.2.  Informative References

   [RFC3410]  Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart,
              "Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet-
              Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410, December 2002.

   [RFC2629]  Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629,
              June 1999.

   [RFC4181]  Heard, C., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of MIB
              Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, September 2005.

   [I-D.kunze-g-698-2-management-control-framework]
              Kunze, R., "A framework for Management and Control of
              optical interfaces supporting G.698.2",
              draft-kunze-g-698-2-management-control-framework-00 (work
              in progress), July 2011.

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 20]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   [RFC4054]  Strand, J. and A. Chiu, "Impairments and Other Constraints
              on Optical Layer Routing", RFC 4054, May 2005.

Appendix A.  Change Log

   This optional section should be removed before the internet draft is
   submitted to the IESG for publication as an RFC.

   Note to RFC Editor: please remove this appendix before publication as
   an RFC.

Appendix B.  Open Issues

   Note to RFC Editor: please remove this appendix before publication as
   an RFC.

Authors' Addresses

   Gabriele Galimberti (editor)
   Cisco
   Via Philips,12
   20052 - Monza
   Italy

   Phone: +390392091462
   Email: ggalimbe@cisco.com

   Ruediger Kunze (editor)
   Deutsche Telekom
   Dddd, xx
   Berlin
   Germany

   Phone: +49xxxxxxxxxx
   Email: RKunze@telekom.de

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 21]
Internet-Draft   draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-01    October 2011

   Hing-Kam Lam (editor)
   Alcatel-Lucent
   D, x
   New Jersey
   USA

   Phone: +19085820672
   Email: kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com

G.Galimberti, et al.       Expires May 3, 2012                 [Page 22]