Definitions of Managed Objects for Remote Ping, Traceroute, and Lookup Operations
draft-ietf-disman-remops-mib-v2-09

[Ballot discuss]
Clarifications requested following Gen-ART review by Joel Halpern and discussion with author:

OLD:
1.3.  Lookup

  The Lookup operation enables remote lookup of addresses for a
  symbolic name as it is, for example, performed by functions
  getnameinfo() or gethostbyaddr() and lookup of symbolic names for a
  addresses as it is, for example, performed by functions getaddrinfo()
  or gethostbyname().  The lookup capability can be used to determine
  the symbolic name of a hop in a traceroute path.

NEW:
1.3.  Lookup

  The Lookup operation enables remote lookup of addresses for a
  symbolic name as it is, for example, performed by functions
  getnameinfo() or gethostbyaddr() and lookup of symbolic names for a
  addresses as it is, for example, performed by functions getaddrinfo()
  or gethostbyname().  Note that whatever lookup function is chosen,
  results are not necessarily consistent with the results of a pure
  Domain Name Service (DNS) lookup, but may be influenced by local
  lookup tables or other sources of information.  The lookup capability
  can be used to determine the symbolic name of a hop in a traceroute
  path.  Also the reverse lookup can be used, for example, for analyzing
  name lookup problems.

OLD:
3.1.4.  pingProbeHistoryTable

  The results of past ping probes can be stored in this table on a per
  pingCtlEntry basis.  This table is initially indexed by
  pingCtlOwnerIndex and pingCtlTestName in order for the results of a
  probe to relate to the pingCtlEntry that caused it.  The maximum
  number of entries stored in this table per pingCtlEntry is determined
  by the value of pingCtlMaxRows.

NEW:
3.1.4.  pingProbeHistoryTable

  The results of each past ping probe are stored in this table on a
  per pingCtlEntry basis.  This table is initially indexed by
  pingCtlOwnerIndex and pingCtlTestName in order for the results of a
  probe to relate to the pingCtlEntry that caused it.  The maximum
  number of entries stored in this table per pingCtlEntry is determined
  by the value of pingCtlMaxRows.

OLD:
3.3.3.  lookupResultsTable

  The lookupResultsTable is used to store the results of lookup
  operations.  The lookupResultsTable is initially indexed by the same

NEW:
3.3.3.  lookupResultsTable

  The lookupResultsTable is used to store the results of lookup
  operations.  Results to be reported here SHOULD be results of
  a lookup function that is commonly used by applications at the
  managed node. This implies that results are not necessarily
  consistent with the results of a pure DNS lookup at the
  managed node, but may be influenced by local lookup tables or
  other sources of information, depending on the configuration of
  the managed node.

  The lookupResultsTable is initially indexed by the same

OLD:
  -- Ping Results Table

    pingResultsTable OBJECT-TYPE
      SYNTAX      SEQUENCE OF PingResultsEntry
      MAX-ACCESS  not-accessible
      STATUS      current
      DESCRIPTION
          "Defines the Ping Results Table for providing
          the capability of performing ping operations at
          a remote host.  The results of these operations are
          stored in the pingResultsTable and the pingPastProbeTable.

NEW:
  -- Ping Results Table

    pingResultsTable OBJECT-TYPE
      SYNTAX      SEQUENCE OF PingResultsEntry
      MAX-ACCESS  not-accessible
      STATUS      current
      DESCRIPTION
          "Defines the Ping Results Table for providing
          the capability of performing ping operations at
          a remote host.  The results of these operations are
          stored in the pingResultsTable and the pingProbeHistoryTable.

[Ballot comment]
Language that should probably be corrected, because RFC 2474
supersedes the RFC1812 TOS octet:
"Refer to RFC 1812 for the definition of the IPv4 TOS
  octet and to RFC 2460 for the definition of the IPv6
  Traffic Class octet.  Refer to RFC 2474 and RFC 3260
  for the definition of the Differentiated Services Field."
(This text occurs twice)

[Ballot discuss]
Clarifications requested following Gen-ART review by Joel Halpern and discussion with author:

OLD:
1.3.  Lookup

  The Lookup operation enables remote lookup of addresses for a
  symbolic name as it is, for example, performed by functions
  getnameinfo() or gethostbyaddr() and lookup of symbolic names for a
  addresses as it is, for example, performed by functions getaddrinfo()
  or gethostbyname().  The lookup capability can be used to determine
  the symbolic name of a hop in a traceroute path.

NEW:
1.3.  Lookup

  The Lookup operation enables remote lookup of addresses for a
  symbolic name as it is, for example, performed by functions
  getnameinfo() or gethostbyaddr() and lookup of symbolic names for a
  addresses as it is, for example, performed by functions getaddrinfo()
  or gethostbyname().  Note that whatever lookup function is chosen,
  results are not necessarily consistent with the results of a pure
  Domain Name Service (DNS) lookup, but may be influenced by local
  lookup tables or other sources of information.  The lookup capability
  can be used to determine the symbolic name of a hop in a traceroute
  path.  Also the reverse lookup can be used, for example, for analyzing
  name lookup problems.

OLD:
3.1.4.  pingProbeHistoryTable

  The results of past ping probes can be stored in this table on a per
  pingCtlEntry basis.  This table is initially indexed by
  pingCtlOwnerIndex and pingCtlTestName in order for the results of a
  probe to relate to the pingCtlEntry that caused it.  The maximum
  number of entries stored in this table per pingCtlEntry is determined
  by the value of pingCtlMaxRows.

NEW:
3.1.4.  pingProbeHistoryTable

  The results of each past ping probe are stored in this table on a
  per pingCtlEntry basis.  This table is initially indexed by
  pingCtlOwnerIndex and pingCtlTestName in order for the results of a
  probe to relate to the pingCtlEntry that caused it.  The maximum
  number of entries stored in this table per pingCtlEntry is determined
  by the value of pingCtlMaxRows.

OLD:
  -- Ping Results Table

    pingResultsTable OBJECT-TYPE
      SYNTAX      SEQUENCE OF PingResultsEntry
      MAX-ACCESS  not-accessible
      STATUS      current
      DESCRIPTION
          "Defines the Ping Results Table for providing
          the capability of performing ping operations at
          a remote host.  The results of these operations are
          stored in the pingResultsTable and the pingPastProbeTable.

NEW:
  -- Ping Results Table

    pingResultsTable OBJECT-TYPE
      SYNTAX      SEQUENCE OF PingResultsEntry
      MAX-ACCESS  not-accessible
      STATUS      current
      DESCRIPTION
          "Defines the Ping Results Table for providing
          the capability of performing ping operations at
          a remote host.  The results of these operations are
          stored in the pingResultsTable and the pingProbeHistoryTable.

MIB Doctor review was posted to WG list on may 4, 2005.
See the review comments (By Juergen Schoenwaelder) below.

Took a while before WG discussion on this started, but it is
(still) taking place now (july 2005), so we need to await the
results. Seems pretty clear we can expect a new revision.

Bert

-----Original Message-----
From: disman-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:disman-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf
Of Randy Presuhn
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 05:56
To: Disman
Subject: [Disman] Fw: MIB Doctor review: publish
draft-ietf-disman-remops-mib-v2-06.tx t


Hi -

Forwarded for your information.

Randy

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Juergen Schoenwaelder"
> To: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)"
> Cc: "Juergen Quittek" ; "Randy Presuhn"
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2005 8:15 AM
> Subject: Re: MIB Doctor review: publish draft-ietf-disman-remops-mib-v2-06.tx t
>

> On Fri, Dec 31, 2004 at 03:25:26PM +0100, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
>
> > Juergen, can you do MIB doctor review on this one?
>
> I am sorry that it took that long. Below are my comments. I suggest
> that Juergen Quittek takes a look at the comments I have first and
> then we perhaps do a quick phone call to work out any misunderstandings.
>
> /js
>
>
> MIB review :
>
> - All three MIB modules compile without problems using smilint 0.4.3
>
> - The abstract has a duplicate "remote" - I suggest to remove the first
>  occurance of "remote".
>
> - The Intrduction could have been reworded. It is kind of strange to
>  start with the IETF keywords phrase followed by the statement that
>  the document originates from the DISMAN WG before actually saying
>  that the document is all about. (I am not even sure it is necessary
>  to point to the DISMAN WG in the introduction.)
>
> - Should the reference to gethostname() and gethostbyaddr() not be
>  replaced or at least be augmented with a reference to getnameinfo()
>  and getaddrinfo() [RFC 3493]? This also affects sections 1.3 and 3.
>
> - Taken the two last comments into account, I suggest:
>
> 1.  Introduction
>
>    This document defines standards-based MIB modules for performing
>    specific remote operations.  The remote operations defined by this
>    document consist of the ping, traceroute, and lookup functions.
>
>    Ping and traceroute are two very useful functions for managing
>    networks.  Ping is typically used to determine if a path exists
>    between two hosts, while traceroute shows an actual path.
>
>    Both ping and traceroute yield round-trip times measured in
>    milliseconds.  These times can be used as a rough approximation for
>    network transit time.
>
>    The lookup functions considered in this document are the
>    equivalents of name to address conversion functions such as
>    gethostbyname() / gethostbyaddr() and getaddrinfo() /
>    getnameinfo().
>
>    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].
>
> - I am not sure the hostent structure is really needed to say that a
>  host may have multiple interfaces (IP addresses) and that multiple
>  names may be given to the same interface (IP address). (The
>  motivation is again to remove IPv4 only API specifics which may
>  mislead implementors.)
>
> - What is an official host name? Oh, I better do not ask this question.
>  So ignore this.
>
> - At the end of section 3.4, you may want to add a sentence explaining
>  why the RFC 2925 compliance statement was deprecated.
>
> - RFC 3291 has been obsoleted by RFC 4001. This affects the references
>  but also the comments in the IMPORT clauses of the three MIB modules.
>
>
> 2. DISMAN-PING-MIB:
>
> - reverse the revision statements (youngest first)
>
> - copyright year needs to be updated to 2005
>
> - pingSnmpQuery description clause "is an" -> "is using an"
>
> - I am wondering why the DEFVAL for pingCtlDescr is '00'H and not an
>  empty string.  (The DEFVAL has been so before so changing this may
>  not be worth it but I am still wondering why we did choose '00'H in
>  the first place.)
>
> - Indentation of TruthValue inconsistent (I am nitpicking here)
>
> - I am wondering whether pingProbeHistoryLastRC values should not be
>  defined by referring to some IANA registry instead of an ip_icmp
>  include file. But probably not worth to fix?
>
> - Is there a rationale why pingCtlRowStatus is not required in the
>  minimum compliance statement? As it stands, I can have an
>  implementation which supports the volatile(2) storage type but I am
>  kind of left alone how to create entries. Please explain what the
>  goal was you were trying to achieve with this construction.
>
> - The description of the DSCP parameter needs to be reworked to
>  actually match RFC 3260. Note that there are actually only 6 bits
>  and not 8 bits.
>
>
> 3. DISMAN-TRACEROUTE-MIB
>
> - reverse the revision statements (youngest first)
>
> - copyright year needs to be updated to 2005
>
> - The description of the DSCP parameter needs to be reworked to
>  actually match RFC 3260. Note that there are actually only 6 bits
>  and not 8 bits.
>
> - I am wondering what traceRouteCtlMiscOptions is good for other than
>  proprietary extensions which IMHO should go into table augmentations.
>  Otherwise, we could put opaque options in almost all tables. I suggest
>  to document how this object is actually used by existing implementations
>  or to deprecate or even obsolete it.
>
> - I am wondering why the DEFVAL for traceRouteCtlDescr is '00'H and
>  not an empty string.  (The DEFVAL has been so before so changing
>  this may not be worth it but I am still wondering why we did choose
>  '00'H in the first place.)
>
> - The description of traceRouteCtlTrapGeneration has a double "to".
>
> - The object traceRouteCtlTrapGeneration should have a DEFVAL clause
>  and the text should say it defaults to "an empty set" and not
>  "zero".
>
> - The referenced object traceRouteHopsIpTargetAddress has a different
>  name.
>
> - I think traceRouteHopsRttSumOfSquares is meant to store the sum of
>  the squares and not just the sum.
>
> - Saying "The compliance statement for the DISMAN-TRACEROUTE-MIB."  in
>  the description clause of a compliance statement when there are
>  multiple compliance statements for the same module is mildly
>  confusing. I suggest to add more meat when this compliance statement
>  applies. (I notice that this comment actually also applies to the
>  other MIB modules - I am not repeating it there to save space and
>  time.)
>
> - Substitute traceRoutengCtlRowStatusGroup with traceRouteCtlRowStatusGroup.
>
> - The minimum compliance statement correctly says that some ojects
>  must be readonly when some optional tables are not supported. I
>  think some similar statements should be made for the full compliance
>  statement since some tables are optionally there as well.
>
> - I have the same question as before about the RowStatus being
>  optional and the implications of being optional. I guess we should
>  discuss this over the phone (or I have to dive into the WG archive).
>
> - I am not sure I understand or like the traceRouteMinimumGroup - I
>  guess this goes back to the RowStatus object which I think is the
>  only one missing in the traceRouteMinimumGroup.
>
> - Summarizing the last two issues, why did you not follow the approach
>  taken by the DIFFSERV-MIB where they have clauses such as the
>  following:
>
>    OBJECT      diffServMaxRateStatus
>    SYNTAX      RowStatus { active(1) }
>    MIN-ACCESS  read-only
>    DESCRIPTION
>        "Write access is not required, and active is the only status that
>        needs to be supported."
>
>
> 4. DISMAN-NSLOOKUP-MIB
>
> - reverse the revision statements (youngest first)
>
> - copyright year needs to be updated to 2005
>
> - lookupCtlTable description referes to gethostbyname/gethostbyaddr as
>  does lookupCtlTargetAddressType and lookupResultsTable
>
> - The second paragraph in the description of lookupCtlEntry is
>  confusing and it is unclear why it is there since
>  lookupCtlTargetAddressType is _not_ a part of the index. I
>  suggest to drop this paragraph altogether.
>
> - The lookupCtlRc object suggests to report errno on systems
>  that have it. Note that errno is only significant if the
>  getnameinfo/getaddrinfo function returns EAI_SYSTEM. I think
>  this object should be described in terms of the standard return
>  codes of the getnameinfo/getaddrinfo functions.
>
> - Not sure what a primary host address is or how I determine that.
>
> - Compliance wording consistency: "SET operations" -> "set operations"
>  and "a SET operation" -> "set operations" (appears multiple times)
>
> - The row status minimum compliance statement here is both more
>  concrete and less concrete. I am wondering how you start a lookup if
>  the row is not dynamically created. Is the lookupCtlRowStatus
>  considered to exist and transition between notInServices and active?
>  (Note that notInService usually has a timer associated, which of
>  course does not make sense here.)
>
>
> 5.  Security Considerations
>
> - The following is stated:
>
>    However, the only information that might be
>    disclosed is the configuration and results of measurements that are
>    performed by implementations of the MIB modules.  This information
>    can only be mis-used in conjunction with the mis-use of further
>    information.
>
>  I am not sure what the last sentence hints at. It sounds like it is
>  trying to make this less a security problem. Note sure this is true.
>  Tracepaths reveals information about paths which some people tend to
>  block (actually becoming more and more popular in enterprise
>  networks it seems).
>
>
> --
> Juergen Schoenwaelder    International University Bremen
>      P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany