Browse Prior Art Database

IP Forwarding Table MIB (RFC2096)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000002648D
Original Publication Date: 1997-Jan-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2019-Feb-16
Document File: 21 page(s) / 22K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

F. Baker: AUTHOR

Related Documents

10.17487/RFC2096: DOI

Abstract

This memo defines an update to RFC 1354. The significant difference between this MIB and RFC 1354 is the recognition (explicitly discussed but by consensus left to future work) that CIDR routes may have the same network number but different network masks. [STANDARDS-TRACK]

This text was extracted from a PDF file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 10% of the total text.

Network Working Group F. Baker Request for Comments: 2096 Cisco Systems Obsoletes: 1354 January 1997 Category: Standards Track

IP Forwarding Table 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.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction .......................................... 1 2. The SNMP Network Management Framework ................. 2 2.1 Object Definitions ................................... 2 3. Overview .............................................. 2 4. Definitions ........................................... 3 5. Acknowledgements ...................................... 20 6. References ............................................ 20 7. Security Considerations ............................... 21 8. Author’s Address ...................................... 21

1. Introduction

This memo defines an update to RFC 1354, "IP Forwarding Table MIB", for Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR). That document was developed by the Router Requirements Working Group as an update to RFC 1213’s ipRouteTable, with the display of multiple routes as a primary objective. The significant difference between this MIB and RFC 1354 is the recognition (explicitly discussed but by consensus left to future work) that CIDR routes may have the same network number but different network masks. Note that this MIB obsoletes a number of objects from RFC 1354. The reader should pay careful attention to the STATUS field.

Baker Standards Track [Page 1]

RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997

2. The SNMP Network Management Framework

The SNMP Network Management Framework presently consists of three major components. They are:

o the SMI, described in RFC 1902 [1], - the mechanisms used for describing and naming objects for the purpose of management.

o the MIB-II, STD 17, RFC 1213 [2], - the core set of managed objects for the Internet suite of protocols.

o the protocol, RFC 1157 [6] and/or RFC 1905 [4], - the protocol for accessing managed information.

Textual conventions are defined in RFC 1903 [3], and conformance statements are defined in RFC 1904 [5].

The Framework permits new objects to be defined for the purpose of experimentation and evaluation.

2.1. Object Definitions

Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store, termed the Management Information Base or MIB. Objects in the MIB are defined using the subset of Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) defined in the SMI. In particular, each object object type is named by an OBJECT IDENTIFIER, an administratively assigned name. The object type together with an object instance serves to uniquely identify a specific instantiation of the object. For human convenience, we often use a textual string, termed the de...

Processing...
Loading...