Transport Performance Metrics MIB
RFC 4150
|
| Document |
Type |
|
RFC - Proposed Standard
(August 2005; No errata)
|
|
Last updated |
|
2015-10-14
|
|
Stream |
|
IETF
|
|
Formats |
|
plain text
pdf
html
bibtex
|
| Stream |
WG state
|
|
(None)
|
|
Document shepherd |
|
No shepherd assigned
|
| IESG |
IESG state |
|
RFC 4150 (Proposed Standard)
|
|
Consensus Boilerplate |
|
Unknown
|
|
Telechat date |
|
|
|
Responsible AD |
|
Bert Wijnen
|
|
Send notices to |
|
(None)
|
Network Working Group R. Dietz
Request for Comments: 4150 Hifn, Inc.
Category: Standards Track R. Cole
JHU/APL
August 2005
Transport Performance Metrics MIB
Status of This Memo
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract
This memo defines a portion of the Management Information Base (MIB)
for use with network management protocols in the Internet community.
In particular, it describes managed objects used for monitoring
selectable performance metrics and statistics derived from the
monitoring of network packets and sub-application level transactions.
The metrics can be defined through reference to existing IETF, ITU,
and other standards organizations' documents. The monitoring covers
both passive and active traffic generation sources.
Dietz & Cole Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 4150 TPM-MIB August 2005
Table of Contents
1. The Internet-Standard Management Framework ......................2
2. Overview ........................................................2
2.1. Terms ......................................................5
2.2. Report Aggregation .........................................5
2.3. Structure of the MIB .......................................6
2.4. Statistics for Aggregation of Data: Conventions ............7
2.5. Relationship to the Remote Monitoring MIB ..................7
2.6. Relationship to RMON2-MIB Protocol Identifier Reference ....7
2.7. Relationship to Standards-Based Performance Metrics ........7
2.8. Relationship to Application Performance Measurement MIB ....8
3. Statistics Perspective ..........................................8
3.1. Statistics Structure ......................................10
3.2. Statistics Analysis .......................................11
4. Definitions ....................................................11
5. Acknowledgements ...............................................51
6. Security Considerations ........................................52
7. Normative References ...........................................53
8. Informative References .........................................54
1. 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].
2. Overview
This document continues the architecture created in the RMON2-MIB
[RFC2021] by providing a major feature upgrade, primarily by
providing new metrics and studies to assist in the analysis of
performance for sub-application transaction flows in the network, in
direct relationship to the transport of application layer protocols.
Performance-monitoring agents have been widely used to analyze the
parameters and metrics related to the perceived performance of
distributed applications and services in networks. The metrics
collected by these agents have ranged from basic response time to a
Dietz & Cole Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 4150 TPM-MIB August 2005
combination of metrics related to the loss and re-transmission of
datagrams and PDUs. Although the metrics are becoming more useful in
the implementation of service-level monitoring and troubleshooting
tools, the lack of a standard method to report these has limited the
deployment to very specific customer needs and areas.
Show full document text