datatracker.ietf.org
Sign in
Version 5.4.0, 2014-04-22
Report a bug

Entity State MIB
RFC 4268

Document type: RFC - Proposed Standard (December 2005; Errata)
Document stream: IETF
Last updated: 2013-03-02
Other versions: plain text, pdf, html

IETF State: (None)
Consensus: Unknown
Document shepherd: No shepherd assigned

IESG State: RFC 4268 (Proposed Standard)
Responsible AD: Bert Wijnen
Send notices to: margaret@thingmagic.com, dperkins@snmpinfo.com, schishol@nortel.com

Network Working Group                                        S. Chisholm
Request for Comments: 4268                               Nortel Networks
Category: Standards Track                                     D. Perkins
                                                                SNMPinfo
                                                           November 2005

                            Entity State 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 extensions to the Entity MIB to provide
   information about the state of physical entities.

   In addition, this memo defines a set of Textual Conventions to
   represent various states of an entity.  The intent is that these
   Textual Conventions will be imported and used in MIB modules that
   would otherwise define their own representations.

Table of Contents

   1. The Internet-Standard Management Framework ......................2
   2. Entity State ....................................................2
      2.1. Hierarchical State Management ..............................3
      2.2. Entity Redundancy ..........................................3
      2.3. Physical Entity Users ......................................3
      2.4. Physical Class Behavior ....................................4
   3. Relation to Other MIBs ..........................................4
      3.1. Relation to the Interfaces MIB .............................4
      3.2. Relation to Alarm MIB ......................................5
      3.3. Relation to Bridge MIB .....................................5
      3.4. Relation to the Host Resources MIB .........................5
   4. Textual Conventions .............................................6
   5. Definitions .................................................... 9

Chisholm & Perkins          Standards Track                     [Page 1]
RFC 4268                    Entity State MIB               November 2005

   6. Security Considerations ........................................16
   7. Acknowledgements ...............................................17
   8. References .....................................................17
      8.1. Normative References ......................................17
      8.2. Informative References ....................................18

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.  Entity State

   The goal in adding state objects to the Entity MIB [RFC4133] is to
   define a useful subset of the possible state attributes that could be
   tracked for a given entity and that both fit into the state models
   such as those used in the Interfaces MIB [RFC2863] as well as
   leverage existing well-deployed models.  The entStateTable contains
   state objects that are a subset of the popular ISO/OSI states that
   are also defined in ITU's X.731 specification [X.731].  Objects are
   defined to capture administrative, operational, and usage states.  In
   addition, there are further state objects defined to provide more
   information for these three basic states.

   Administrative state indicates permission to use or prohibition
   against using the entity and is imposed through the management
   services.

   Operational state indicates whether or not the entity is physically
   installed and working.  Note that unlike the ifOperStatus [RFC2863],
   this operational state is independent of the administrative state.

   Usage state indicates whether or not the entity is in use at a
   specific instance, and if so, whether or not it currently has spare

[include full document text]