📄 rfc3055.txt
字号:
DESCRIPTION "Entries in the gateway table. One entry is defined for each gateway identified by name, each monitored service type and performance statistics collection period." INDEX { pintRegisteredGatewayName, pintServerServiceTypeIndex, pintServerPerfStatPeriodIndex } ::= { pintServerGatewayStatsTable 1 }PintServerGatewayStatsEntry ::= SEQUENCE {pintServerGatewayCallsReceived Counter32,pintServerGatewaySuccessfulCalls Counter32,pintServerGatewayDisconnectedCalls Counter32}pintServerGatewayCallsReceived OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX Counter32 MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Number of calls received at the specified gateway." ::= { pintServerGatewayStatsEntry 1 }pintServerGatewaySuccessfulCalls OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX Counter32 MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Number of calls successfully completed at the specified gateway." ::= { pintServerGatewayStatsEntry 2 }pintServerGatewayDisconnectedCalls OBJECT-TYPE SYNTAX Counter32 MAX-ACCESS read-only STATUS current DESCRIPTION "Number of calls that were disconnected (failed) at the specified gateway." ::= { pintServerGatewayStatsEntry 3 }---- Notifications Section-- (none defined)------ Conformance SectionKrishnaswamy & Romascanu Standards Track [Page 15]RFC 3055 PINT MIB February 2001--pintMibCompliances OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { pintMibConformance 1 }pintMibGroups OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { pintMibConformance 2 }pintMibCompliance MODULE-COMPLIANCESTATUS currentDESCRIPTION "Describes the requirements for conformance to the PINT MIB."MODULE -- this moduleMANDATORY-GROUPS { pintMibConfigGroup, pintMibMonitorGroup }::= { pintMibCompliances 1 }pintMibConfigGroup OBJECT-GROUPOBJECTS {pintReleaseNumber,pintSysContact,pintApplInstallPkgDescription,pintRegisteredGatewayName,pintRegisteredGatewayDescription}STATUS currentDESCRIPTION "A collection of objects providing configuration information for a PINT Server."::= { pintMibGroups 1 }pintMibMonitorGroup OBJECT-GROUPOBJECTS {pintServerGlobalCallsReceived,pintServerGlobalSuccessfulCalls,pintServerGlobalDisconnectedCalls,pintServerGlobalDisCUAutFCalls,pintServerGlobalDisServProbCalls,pintServerGlobalDisGatProbCalls,pintServerClientCallsReceived,pintServerClientSuccessfulCalls,pintServerClientDisconnectedCalls,pintServerClientDisCAutFCalls,pintServerClientDisEFProbCalls,--pintServerUserIdName,pintServerUserIdCallsReceived,pintServerUserIdSuccessfulCalls,pintServerUserIdDisconnectedCalls,pintServerUserIdDiscUIdAFailCalls,pintServerUserIdEFProbCalls,Krishnaswamy & Romascanu Standards Track [Page 16]RFC 3055 PINT MIB February 2001pintServerGatewayCallsReceived,pintServerGatewaySuccessfulCalls,pintServerGatewayDisconnectedCalls}STATUS currentDESCRIPTION "A collection of objects providing monitoring information for a PINT Server."::= { pintMibGroups 2 }END6. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Igor Faynberg for his encouragement to produce this work.7. Security Considerations There is only one management object defined in this MIB that has a MAX-ACCESS clause of read-write (pintSysContact). There are no read-create objects. This read-write object may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. The support for SET operations in a non-secure environment without proper protection can have a negative effect on network operations. There are a number of managed objects in this MIB that may contain information that may be sensitive from a business perspective. One could be the customer identification (UserIdName). Also information on PINT services performance might itself be need to be guarded. It is thus important to control even GET access to these objects and possibly to even encrypt the values of these object when sending them over the network via SNMP. Not all versions of SNMP provide features for such a secure environment. SNMPv1 by itself is not a secure environment. Even if the network itself is secure (for example by using IPSec), even then, there is no control as to who on the secure network is allowed to access and GET/SET (read/change/create/delete) the objects in this MIB. It is recommended that the implementers consider the security features as provided by the SNMPv3 framework. Specifically, the use of the User-based Security Model RFC 2574 [13] and the View-based Access Control Model RFC 2575 [16] is recommended.Krishnaswamy & Romascanu Standards Track [Page 17]RFC 3055 PINT MIB February 2001 It is then a customer/user responsibility to ensure that the SNMP entity giving access to an instance of this MIB, is properly configured to give access to the objects only to those principals (users) that have legitimate rights to indeed GET or SET (change/create/delete) them.8. IANA Considerations All extensions to the values listed in this MIB must be done through Standards Action processes as defined in RFC 2434 [20].9. Intellectual Property 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.10. References [1] Lu, H., Conroy, L., Bellovin, S., Krishnaswamy, M., Burg, F., DeSimone, A., Tewani, K., Davidson, P., Schulzrinne, H. and K. Vishwanathan, "Toward the PSTN/Internet Inter-Networking -- Pre-PINT Implementations", RFC 2458, November 1998. [2] Wijnen, B., Harrington, D. and R. Presuhn, "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.Krishnaswamy & Romascanu Standards Track [Page 18]RFC 3055 PINT MIB February 2001 [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. [6] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D. and J. Schoenwaelder, "Structure of Management Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April 1999. [7] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D. and J. Schoenwaelder, "Textual Conventions for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999. [8] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D. and J. Schoenwaelder, "Conformance Statements for SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, April 1999. [9] Case, J., Fedor, M., Schoffstall, M. and J. Davin, "Simple Network Management Protocol", 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 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, "SNMPv3 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.Krishnaswamy & Romascanu Standards Track [Page 19]RFC 3055 PINT MIB February 2001 [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] Petrack, S. and L. Conroy, "The PINT Service Protocol: Extensions to SIP and SDP for IP Access to Telephone Call Services", RFC 2848, June 2000. [19] Krupczak, C. and J. Saperia, "Definitions of System-Level Managed Objects for Applications", RFC 2287, February 1998. [20] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October 1998.11. Authors' Addresses Murali Krishnaswamy Lucent Technologies 3C-512, 101 Crawfords Corner Rd. Holmdel, NJ 07733 Phone: +1 (732)949-3611 Fax: +1 (732)949-3210 EMail: murali@lucent.com Dan Romascanu Avaya Communication Atidim Technology Park, Bldg 3 Tel Aviv, Israel Phone: +972 3 6458414 EMail: dromasca@avaya.comKrishnaswamy & Romascanu Standards Track [Page 20]RFC 3055 PINT MIB February 200112. 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.Krishnaswamy & Romascanu Standards Track [Page 21]
⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码
Ctrl + C
搜索代码
Ctrl + F
全屏模式
F11
切换主题
Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键
?
增大字号
Ctrl + =
减小字号
Ctrl + -