Network Working Group                                         M. Daniele
Internet-Draft                                                Consultant
Expires: February 21, 2002                                   B. Haberman
                                                         Nortel Networks
                                                             S. Routhier
                                                Wind River Systems, Inc.
                                                        J. Schoenwaelder
                                                         TU Braunschweig
                                                         August 23, 2001


           Textual Conventions for Internet Network Addresses
                  draft-ietf-ops-rfc2851-update-02.txt

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on February 21, 2002.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   This MIB module defines textual conventions to represent commonly
   used Internet network layer addressing information.  The intent is
   that these textual conventions will be imported and used in MIB
   modules that would otherwise define their own representations.

   This document obsoletes RFC 2851.



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.  The SNMP Management Framework  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  Usage Hints  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   4.1 Table Indexing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   4.2 Uniqueness of Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   4.3 Multiple InetAddresses per Host  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   4.4 Resolving DNS Names  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   5.  Table Indexing Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
   6.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   7.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   8.  Intellectual Property Notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   9.  Changes from RFC 2851  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   10. Open Issues  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
       References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
       Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
       Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
































Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


1. Introduction

   Several standard-track MIB modules use the IpAddress SMIv2 base type.
   This limits the applicability of these MIB modules to IP Version 4
   (IPv4) since the IpAddress SMIv2 base type can only contain 4 byte
   IPv4 addresses.  The IpAddress SMIv2 base type has become problematic
   with the introduction of IP Version 6 (IPv6) addresses [19].

   This document defines multiple textual conventions as a mechanism to
   express generic Internet network layer addresses within MIB module
   specifications.  The solution is compatible with SMIv2 (STD 58) and
   SMIv1 (STD 16).  New MIB definitions which need to express network
   layer Internet addresses SHOULD use the textual conventions defined
   in this memo.  New MIB modules SHOULD NOT use the SMIv2 IpAddress
   base type anymore.

   A generic Internet address consists of two objects, one whose syntax
   is InetAddressType, and another whose syntax is InetAddress.  The
   value of the first object determines how the value of the second
   object is encoded.  The InetAddress textual convention represents an
   opaque Internet address value.  The InetAddressType enumeration is
   used to "cast" the InetAddress value into a concrete textual
   convention for the address type.  This usage of multiple textual
   conventions allows expression of the display characteristics of each
   address type and makes the set of defined Internet address types
   extensible.

   The textual conventions defined in this document can be used to
   define Internet addresses by using DNS domain names in addition to
   IPv4 and IPv6 addresses.  A MIB designer can write compliance
   statements to express that only a subset of the possible address
   types must be supported by a compliant implementation.

   MIB developers who need to represent Internet addresses SHOULD use
   these definitions whenever applicable, as opposed to defining their
   own constructs.  Even MIB modules that only need to represent IPv4 or
   IPv6 addresses SHOULD use the textual conventions defined in this
   memo.

   There are many widely deployed MIB modules that use IPv4 addresses
   and which need to be revised to support IPv6.  These MIBs can be
   categorized as follows:

   1.  MIB modules which define management information that is in
       principle IP version neutral, but the MIB currently uses
       addressing constructs specific to a certain IP version.

   2.  MIB modules which define management information that is specific



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


       to particular IP version (either IPv4 or IPv6) and which is very
       unlikely to be ever applicable to another IP version.

   MIB modules of the first type SHOULD provide object definitions (e.g.
   tables) that work with all versions of IP.  In particular, when
   revising a MIB module which contains IPv4 specific tables, it is
   suggested to define new tables using the textual conventions defined
   in this memo which support all versions of IP.  The status of the new
   tables SHOULD be "current" while the status of the old IP version
   specific tables SHOULD be changed to "deprecated".  The other
   approach of having multiple similar tables for different IP versions
   is strongly discouraged.

   MIB modules of the second type, which are inherently IP version
   specific, do not need to be redefined.  Note that even in this case,
   any additions to these MIB modules or new IP version specific MIB
   modules SHOULD use the textual conventions defined in this memo.

   MIB developers SHOULD NOT use the textual conventions defined in this
   document to represent generic transport layer addresses.  Instead the
   SMIv2 TAddress textual convention and associated definitions should
   be used for transport layer addresses.

   This memo introduces some ordering constraints in order to achieve
   the following two goals:

   1.  Enable programs to identify the InetAddressType object which
       discriminates a certain InetAddress object.  This allows tools
       such as MIB compilers to understand the dependencies and to
       generate code to e.g.  handle some error conditions.

   2.  Provide some rules that prevent MIB module authors from doing
       certain mistakes which can make future extensions of tables with
       new objects impossible.

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT" and "MAY" in
   this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [1].

2. The SNMP Management Framework

   The SNMP Management Framework presently consists of five major
   components:

   o  An overall architecture, described in RFC 2571 [2].

   o  Mechanisms for describing and naming objects and events for the
      purpose of management.  The first version of this Structure of
      Management Information (SMI) is called SMIv1 and described in STD



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


      16, RFC 1155 [3], STD 16, RFC 1212 [4] and RFC 1215 [5].  The
      second version, called SMIv2, is described in STD 58, RFC 2578
      [6], STD 58, RFC 2579 [7] and STD 58, RFC 2580 [8].

   o  Message protocols for transferring management information.  The
      first version of the SNMP message protocol is called SNMPv1 and
      described in STD 15, RFC 1157 [9].  A second version of the SNMP
      message protocol, which is not an Internet standards track
      protocol, is called SNMPv2c and described in RFC 1901 [10] and RFC
      1906 [11].  The third version of the message protocol is called
      SNMPv3 and described in RFC 1906 [11], RFC 2572 [12] and RFC 2574
      [13].

   o  Protocol operations for accessing management information.  The
      first set of protocol operations and associated PDU formats is
      described in STD 15, RFC 1157 [9].  A second set of protocol
      operations and associated PDU formats is described in RFC 1905
      [14].

   o  A set of fundamental applications described in RFC 2573 [15] and
      the view-based access control mechanism described in RFC 2575
      [16].

   A more detailed introduction to the current SNMP Management Framework
   can be found in RFC 2570 [17].

   Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed
   the Management Information Base or MIB.  Objects in the MIB are
   defined using the mechanisms defined in the SMI.

   This memo specifies a MIB module that is compliant to the SMIv2.  A
   MIB conforming to the SMIv1 can be produced through the appropriate
   translations.  The resulting translated MIB must be semantically
   equivalent, except where objects or events are omitted because no
   translation is possible (use of Counter64).  Some machine readable
   information in SMIv2 will be converted into textual descriptions in
   SMIv1 during the translation process.  However, this loss of machine
   readable information is not considered to change the semantics of the
   MIB.

3. Definitions

   INET-ADDRESS-MIB DEFINITIONS ::= BEGIN

   IMPORTS
       MODULE-IDENTITY, mib-2, Unsigned32 FROM SNMPv2-SMI
       TEXTUAL-CONVENTION                 FROM SNMPv2-TC;




Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


   inetAddressMIB MODULE-IDENTITY
       LAST-UPDATED "200107130000Z"
       ORGANIZATION
           "IETF Operations and Management Area"
       CONTACT-INFO
           "Juergen Schoenwaelder (Editor)
            TU Braunschweig
            Bueltenweg 74/75
            38106 Braunschweig, Germany

            Phone: +49 531 391-3289
            EMail: schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de

            Send comments to <mibs@ops.ietf.org>."

       DESCRIPTION
           "This MIB module defines textual conventions for
            representing Internet addresses. An Internet
            address can be an IPv4 address, an IPv6 address
            or a DNS domain name."

       REVISION     "200107130000Z"
       DESCRIPTION
           "Second version, published as RFC XXXX. This
            revisions contains several clarifications and it
            introduces some new textual conventions:
            InetAddressPrefixLength, InetPortNumber, and
            InetAutonomousSystemNumber."

       REVISION     "200006080000Z"
       DESCRIPTION
           "Initial version, published as RFC 2851."
       ::= { mib-2 76 }

   InetAddressType ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
       STATUS      current
       DESCRIPTION
           "A value that represents a type of Internet address.

            unknown(0)  An unknown address type. This value MUST
                        be used if the value of the corresponding
                        InetAddress object is a zero-length string.
                        It may also be used to indicate an IP address
                        which is not in one of the formats defined
                        below.

            ipv4(1)     An IPv4 address as defined by the
                        InetAddressIPv4 textual convention.



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


            ipv6(2)     An IPv6 address as defined by the
                        InetAddressIPv6 textual convention.

            dns(16)     A DNS domain name as defined by the
                        InetAddressDNS textual convention.

            Each definition of a concrete InetAddressType value must be
            accompanied by a definition of a textual convention for use
            with that InetAddressType.

            The InetAddressType textual convention SHOULD NOT be sub-typed
            in object type definitions to support future extensions. It
            MAY be sub-typed in compliance statements in order to require
            only a subset of these address types for a compliant
            implementation.

            Implementations must ensure that InetAddressType objects
            and any dependent objects (e.g. InetAddress objects) are
            consistent.  An inconsistentValue error must be generated
            if an attempt to change an InetAddressType object would,
            for example, lead to an undefined InetAddress value.  In
            particular, InetAddressType/InetAddress pairs must be
            changed together if the address type changes (e.g. from
            ipv6(2) to ipv4(1))."
       SYNTAX      INTEGER {
                       unknown(0),
                       ipv4(1),    -- these named numbers are aligned
                       ipv6(2),    -- with AddressFamilyNumbers from
                       dns(16)     -- IANA-ADDRESS-FAMILY-NUMBERS-MIB
                   }

   InetAddress ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
       STATUS      current
       DESCRIPTION
           "Denotes a generic Internet address.

            An InetAddress value is always interpreted within the
            context of an InetAddressType value. The InetAddressType
            object which defines the format of the InetAddress
            value MUST be registered before the object(s) which use
            the InetAddress textual convention.

            The value of an InetAddress object must always be
            consistent with the value of the associated InetAddressType
            object. Attempts to set an InetAddress object to a value
            which is inconsistent with the associated InetAddressType
            must fail with an inconsistentValue error.




Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


            When this textual convention is used as the syntax of an
            index object, there may be issues with the limit of 128
            sub-identifiers specified in SMIv2, STD 58. In this case,
            the OBJECT-TYPE declaration MUST include a 'SIZE' clause
            to limit the number of potential instance sub-identifiers."
       SYNTAX      OCTET STRING (SIZE (0..255))

   InetAddressIPv4 ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
       DISPLAY-HINT "1d.1d.1d.1d"
       STATUS       current
       DESCRIPTION
           "Represents an IPv4 network address:

              octets   contents         encoding
               1-4     IPv4 address     network-byte order

            The corresponding InetAddressType value is ipv4(1)."
       SYNTAX       OCTET STRING (SIZE (4))

   InetAddressIPv6 ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
       DISPLAY-HINT "2x:2x:2x:2x:2x:2x:2x:2x%4d"
       STATUS       current
       DESCRIPTION
           "Represents an IPv6 network address:

              octets   contents         encoding
               1-16    IPv6 address     network-byte order
              17-20    scope identifier network-byte order

            The corresponding InetAddressType value is ipv6(2).

            The scope identifier (bytes 17-20) MUST NOT be present
            for global IPv6 addresses. For non-global IPv6 addresses
            (e.g. link-local or site-local addresses), the scope
            identifier MUST be present if there is no other way to
            disambiguate non-global IPv6 addresses. The scope
            identifier contains a link identifier for link-local
            and a site identifier for site-local IPv6 addresses.

            The scope identifier MUST disambiguate identical address
            values. For link-local addresses, the scope identifier
            will typically be the interface index (ifIndex as defined
            in the IF-MIB, RFC 2863) of the interface on which the
            address is configured.

            The scope identifier may contain the special value 0
            which refers to the default scope. The default scope
            may be used in cases where the valid scope identifier



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


            is not known (e.g., a management application needs to
            write a site-local InetAddressIPv6 address without
            knowing the site identifier value). The default scope
            SHOULD NOT be used as an easy way out in cases where
            the scope identifier for a non-global IPv6 address
            is known."
       SYNTAX       OCTET STRING (SIZE (16|20))

   InetAddressDNS ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
       DISPLAY-HINT "255a"
       STATUS       current
       DESCRIPTION
           "Represents a DNS domain name. The name SHOULD be
            fully qualified whenever possible.

            The corresponding InetAddressType is dns(16).

            The DESCRIPTION clause of InetAddress objects that
            may have InetAddressDNS values must fully describe
            how (and when) such names are to be resolved to IP
            addresses."
       SYNTAX       OCTET STRING (SIZE (1..255))

   InetAddressPrefixLength ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
       STATUS      current
       DESCRIPTION
           "Denotes the length of a generic Internet network address
            prefix. A value of n corresponds to an IP address mask
            which has n contiguous 1-bits from the most significant
            bit (MSB) and all other bits set to 0.

            An InetAddressPrefixLength value is always interpreted
            within the context of an InetAddressType value. The
            InetAddressType object must be registered before the
            object which uses the InetAddressPrefixLength textual
            convention.

            InetAddressPrefixLength values that are larger than
            the maximum length of an IP address for a specific
            InetAddressType are treated as the maximum significant
            value applicable for the InetAddressType. The maximum
            significant value is 32 for the InetAddressType
            'ipv4(1)' and 128 for the InetAddressType 'ipv6(2)'.
            The maximum significant value for the InetAddressType
            'dns(16)' is 0.

            The value zero is object-specific and must be defined as
            part of the description of any object which uses this



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


            syntax. Examples of the usage of zero might include
            situations where the Internet network address prefix
            is unknown or does not apply."
       SYNTAX      Unsigned32

   InetPortNumber ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
       STATUS      current
       DESCRIPTION
           "Represents a 16 bit port number of an Internet transport
            layer protocol. Port numbers are assigned by IANA. A
            current list of all assignments is available from
            <http://www.iana.org/>.

            The value zero is object-specific and must be defined as
            part of the description of any object which uses this
            syntax. Examples of the usage of zero might include
            situations where a port number is unknown, or when the
            value zero is used as a wildcard in a filter."
       REFERENCE  "STD 6 (RFC 768), STD 7 (RFC 793) and RFC 2960"
       SYNTAX      Unsigned32 (0..65535)

   InetAutonomousSystemNumber ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
       STATUS      current
       DESCRIPTION
           "Represents an autonomous system number which identifies an
            Autonomous System (AS). An AS is a set of routers under a
            single technical administration, using an interior gateway
            protocol and common metrics to route packets within the AS,
            and using an exterior gateway protocol to route packets to
            other ASs'. IANA maintains the AS number space and has
            delegated large parts to the regional registries.

            Autonomous system numbers are currently limited to 16 bits
            (0..65535). There is however work in progress to enlarge the
            autonomous system number space to 32 bits. This textual
            convention therefore uses an Unsigned32 value without a
            range restriction in order to support a larger autonomous
            system number space."
       REFERENCE  "RFC 1771, RFC 1930"
       SYNTAX      Unsigned32

   END


4. Usage Hints

   One particular usage of InetAddressType/InetAddress pairs is to avoid
   over-constraining an object definition by the use of the IpAddress



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


   SMI base type.  An InetAddressType/InetAddress pair allows to
   represent IP addresses in various formats.

   The InetAddressType and InetAddress objects SHOULD NOT be sub-typed.
   Sub-typing binds the MIB module to specific address formats, which
   may cause serious problems if new address formats need to be
   introduced.  Note that it is possible to write compliance statements
   in order to express that only a subset of the defined address types
   must be implemented to be compliant.

   The InetAddressType object must be registered before the InetAddress
   object(s) or InetAddressPrefixLength object(s).  In other words, the
   object identifiers for the InetAddressType object and the InetAddress
   object MUST have the same length and the last sub-identifier of the
   InetAddressType object MUST be less than the last sub-identifier of
   the InetAddress object.  This rule allows programs such as MIB
   compilers to identify the InetAddressType of a given InetAddress or
   InetAddressPrefixLength object by searching for the InetAddressType
   object which precedes InetAddress or InetAddressPrefixLength
   registration.

4.1 Table Indexing

   When a generic Internet address is used as an index, both the
   InetAddressType and InetAddress objects MUST be used.  The
   InetAddressType object MUST be listed before the InetAddress object
   in the INDEX clause.

   The IMPLIED keyword MUST NOT be used for an object of type
   InetAddress in an INDEX clause.  Instance sub-identifiers are then of
   the form T.N.O1.O2...On, where T is the value of the InetAddressType
   object, O1...On are the octets in the InetAddress object, and N is
   the number of those octets.

   There is a meaningful lexicographical ordering to tables indexed in
   this fashion.  Command generator applications may lookup specific
   addresses of known type and value, issue GetNext requests for
   addresses of a single type, or issue GetNext requests for a specific
   type and address prefix.

4.2 Uniqueness of Addresses

   IPv4 addresses were intended to be globally unique, current usage
   notwithstanding.  IPv6 addresses were architected to have different
   scopes and hence uniqueness [19].  In particular, IPv6 "link-local"
   and "site-local" addresses are not guaranteed to be unique on any
   particular node.  In such cases, the duplicate addresses must be
   configured on different interfaces.  So the combination of an IPv6



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


   address and an interface number is unique.  The interface number may
   therefore be used as a scope identifier.

   The InetAddressIPv6 textual convention has been defined to represent
   global and non-global IPv6 addresses.  MIB designers who use
   InetAddressType/InetAddress pairs therefore do not need define
   additional objects in order to support link-local or site-local
   addresses.

   The size of the scope identifier has been chosen so that it matches
   the sin6_scope_id field of the sockaddr_in6 structure defined in RFC
   2553 [20].

4.3 Multiple InetAddresses per Host

   A single host system may be configured with multiple addresses (IPv4
   or IPv6), and possibly with multiple DNS names.  Thus it is possible
   for a single host system to be accessible by multiple
   InetAddressType/InetAddress pairs.

   If this could be an implementation or usage issue, then the
   DESCRIPTION clause of the relevant objects MUST fully describe
   required behavior.

4.4 Resolving DNS Names

   DNS names must be resolved to IP addresses when communication with
   the named host is required.  This raises a temporal aspect to
   defining MIB objects whose value is a DNS name: When is the name
   translated to an address?

   For example, consider an object defined to indicate a forwarding
   destination, and whose value is a DNS name.  When does the forwarding
   entity resolve the DNS name? Each time forwarding occurs or just once
   when the object was instantiated?

   The DESCRIPTION clause of such objects SHOULD precisely define how
   and when any required name to address resolution is done.

   Similarly, the DESCRIPTION clause of such objects SHOULD precisely
   define how and when a reverse lookup is being done if an agent has
   accessed instrumentation that knows about an IP address and the MIB
   module or implementation requires to map the IP address to a DNS
   name.

5. Table Indexing Example

   This example shows a table listing communication peers that are



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002              [Page 12]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


   identified by either an IPv4 address, an IPv6 address or a DNS name.
   The table definition also prohibits entries with an empty address
   (whose type would be "unknown").  The size of a DNS name is limited
   to 64 characters.


   peerTable OBJECT-TYPE
       SYNTAX      SEQUENCE OF PeerEntry
       MAX-ACCESS  not-accessible
       STATUS      current
       DESCRIPTION
           "A list of communication peers."
       ::= { somewhere 1 }

   peerEntry OBJECT-TYPE
       SYNTAX      PeerEntry
       MAX-ACCESS  not-accessible
       STATUS      current
       DESCRIPTION
           "An entry containing information about a particular peer."
       INDEX       { peerAddressType, peerAddress }
       ::= { peerTable 1 }

   PeerEntry ::= SEQUENCE {
       peerAddressType     InetAddressType,
       peerAddress         InetAddress,
       peerStatus          INTEGER
   }

   peerAddressType OBJECT-TYPE
       SYNTAX      InetAddressType
       MAX-ACCESS  not-accessible
       STATUS      current
       DESCRIPTION
           "The type of Internet address by which the peer
            is reachable."
       ::= { peerEntry 1 }

   peerAddress OBJECT-TYPE
       SYNTAX      InetAddress (SIZE (1..64))
       MAX-ACCESS  not-accessible
       STATUS      current
       DESCRIPTION
           "The Internet address for the peer. Note that
            implementations must limit themselves to a single
            entry in this table per reachable peer.

            The peerAddress may not be empty due to the SIZE



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002              [Page 13]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


            restriction.

            If a row is created administratively by an SNMP
            operation and the address type value is dns(16), then
            the agent stores the DNS name internally. A DNS name
            lookup must be performed on the internally stored DNS
            name whenever it is being used to contact the peer.

            If a row is created by the managed entity itself and
            the address type value is dns(16), then the agent
            stores the IP address internally. A DNS reverse lookup
            must be performed on the internally stored IP address
            whenever the value is retrieved via SNMP."
       ::= { peerEntry 2 }


   The following compliance statement specifies that implementations
   need only support IPv4 addresses and globally unique IPv6 addresses
   to be compliant.  Support for DNS names or scoped IPv6 addresses is
   not required.

   peerCompliance MODULE-COMPLIANCE
       STATUS      current
       DESCRIPTION
           "The compliance statement the peer MIB."

       MODULE      -- this module
       MANDATORY-GROUPS    { peerGroup }

       OBJECT  peerAddressType
       SYNTAX  InetAddressType { ipv4(1), ipv6(2) }
       DESCRIPTION
           "An implementation is only required to support IPv4
            and IPv6 addresses."

       OBJECT  peerAddress
       SYNTAX  InetAddress (SIZE(4|16))
       DESCRIPTION
           "An implementation is only required to support IPv4
            and globally unique IPv6 addresses."

       ::= { somewhere 2 }

   Note that the SMIv2 does not permit inclusion of not-accessible
   objects in an object group (see section 3.1 in STD 58, RFC 2580 [8]).
   It is therefore not possible to formally refine the syntax of
   auxiliary objects which are not-accessible.  In such a case, it is
   suggested to express the refinement informally in the DESCRIPTION



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002              [Page 14]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


   clause of the MODULE-COMPLIANCE macro invocation.

6. Security Considerations

   This module does not define any management objects.  Instead, it
   defines a set of textual conventions which may be used by other MIB
   modules to define management objects.

   Meaningful security considerations can only be written in the MIB
   modules that define management objects.  This document has therefore
   no impact on the security of the Internet.

7. Acknowledgments

   This document was produced by the Operations and Management Area
   "IPv6MIB" design team.  The authors would like to thank Fred Baker,
   Randy Bush, Richard Draves, Mark Ellison, Bill Fenner, Jun-ichiro
   Hagino, Tim Jenkins, Glenn Mansfield, Keith McCloghrie, Thomas
   Narten, Erik Nordmark, Peder Chr.  Norgaard, Randy Presuhn, Andrew
   Smith, Dave Thaler, Kenneth White, Bert Wijnen, and Brian Zill for
   their comments and suggestions.

8. Intellectual Property Notice

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
   has made any effort to identify any such rights.  Information on the
   IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
   standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11.  Copies of
   claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
   licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
   obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
   proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can
   be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF Executive
   Director.

9. Changes from RFC 2851

   The following changes have been made relative to RFC 2851:




Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002              [Page 15]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


   o  Added new TCs: InetAddressPrefixLength, InetPortNumber,
      InetAutonomousSystemNumber

   o  Rewrote the introduction to say clearly that in general, one
      should define MIB tables that work with all versions of IP.  The
      other approach of multiple tables for different IP versions is
      strongly discouraged.  (kzm)

   o  Added text to the InetAddressType and InetAddress descriptions
      which requires that implementations must reject set operations
      with an inconsistentValue error if they lead to inconsistencies.

   o  Relaxed the rules to make it possible to register tuples where
      multiple objects share an InetAddressType value, which is needed
      for filters of the form (InetAddressType, InetAddress,
      InetPortNumber, InetAddress InetPortNumber).

   o  Added a paragraph in the Introduction which explains the
      motivation for the ordering constraints.


10. Open Issues

   o  Check that the document is consistent with draft-ietf-ipngwg-
      scoping-arch-02.txt and add a reference to it.

   o  Addition of an InetScopeIdentifier TC? (Bill Fenner)

   o  Is there a need to represent scoped IPv4 addresses?

References

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

   [2]   Harrington, D., Presuhn, R. and B. Wijnen, "An Architecture for
         Describing SNMP Management Frameworks", RFC 2571, April 1999.

   [3]   Rose, M. and K. McCloghrie, "Structure and Identification of
         Management Information for TCP/IP-based Internets", STD 16, RFC
         1155, May 1990.

   [4]   Rose, M. and K. McCloghrie, "Concise MIB Definitions", STD 16,
         RFC 1212, March 1991.

   [5]   Rose, M., "A Convention for Defining Traps for use with the
         SNMP", RFC 1215, March 1991.




Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002              [Page 16]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


   [6]   McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J., Rose,
         M. and S. Waldbusser, "Structure of Management Information
         Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April 1999.

   [7]   McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J., Rose,
         M. and S. Waldbusser, "Textual Conventions for SMIv2", STD 58,
         RFC 2579, April 1999.

   [8]   McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J., Rose,
         M. and S. Waldbusser, "Conformance Statements for SMIv2", STD
         58, RFC 2580, April 1999.

   [9]   Case, J., Fedor, M., Schoffstall, M. and J. Davin, "A Simple
         Network Management Protocol (SNMP)", STD 15, RFC 1157, May
         1990.

   [10]  Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser,
         "Introduction to Community-based SNMPv2", RFC 1901, January
         1996.

   [11]  Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser,
         "Transport Mappings for Version 2 of the Simple Network
         Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1906, January 1996.

   [12]  Case, J., Harrington, D., Presuhn, R. and B. Wijnen, "Message
         Processing and Dispatching for the Simple Network Management
         Protocol (SNMP)", RFC 2572, April 1999.

   [13]  Blumenthal, U. and B. Wijnen, "User-based Security Model (USM)
         for version 3 of the Simple Network Management Protocol
         (SNMPv3)", RFC 2574, April 1999.

   [14]  Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Protocol
         Operations for Version 2 of the Simple Network Management
         Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1905, January 1996.

   [15]  Levi, D., Meyer, P. and B. Stewart, "SNMP Applications", RFC
         2573, April 1999.

   [16]  Wijnen, B., Presuhn, R. and K. McCloghrie, "View-based Access
         Control Model (VACM) for the Simple Network Management Protocol
         (SNMP)", RFC 2575, April 1999.

   [17]  Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D. and B. Stewart, "Introduction
         to Version 3 of the Internet-standard Network Management
         Framework", RFC 2570, April 1999.

   [18]  McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group MIB",



Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002              [Page 17]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


         RFC 2863, June 2000.

   [19]  Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
         Architecture", RFC 2373, July 1998.

   [20]  Gilligan, R., Thomson, S., Bound, J. and W. Stevens, "Basic
         Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6", RFC 2553, March 1999.


Authors' Addresses

   Mike Daniele
   Consultant
   19 Pinewood Rd
   Hudson, NH  03051
   USA

   Phone: +1 603 883-6365
   EMail: mwdaniele@adelphia.net


   Brian Haberman
   Nortel Networks
   4039 Emperor Blvd., Suite 200
   Durham, NC  27703
   USA

   Phone: +1 919 992-4439
   EMail: haberman@nortelnetworks.com


   Shawn A. Routhier
   Wind River Systems, Inc.
   1 Tara Blvd, Suite 403
   Nashua, NH  03062
   USA

   Phone: +1 603 897-2000
   EMail: sar@epilogue.com












Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002              [Page 18]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


   Juergen Schoenwaelder
   TU Braunschweig
   Bueltenweg 74/75
   38106 Braunschweig
   Germany

   Phone: +49 531 391-3289
   EMail: schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de











































Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002              [Page 19]


Internet-Draft     TCs for Internet Network Addresses        August 2001


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001).  All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.



















Daniele, et. al.        Expires February 21, 2002              [Page 20]