RFC 3814 (rfc3814) - Page 1 of 42

Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Forwarding Equivalence Class To Next Hop Label Forwarding Entry (FEC-To-NHLFE) Management Information Base (MIB)

Alternative Format: Original Text Document
Next >
Network Working Group                                          T. Nadeau
Request for Comments: 3814                           Cisco Systems, Inc.
Category: Standards Track                                  C. Srinivasan
                                                          Bloomberg L.P.
                                                          A. Viswanathan
                                                  Force10 Networks, Inc.
                                                               June 2004


      Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Forwarding Equivalence
        Class To Next Hop Label Forwarding Entry (FEC-To-NHLFE)
                   Management Information Base (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 (2004).

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 for defining,
   configuring, and monitoring Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) to
   Next Hop Label Forwarding Entry (NHLFE) mappings and corresponding
   actions for use with Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS).

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
   2.  Terminology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3.  Conventions Used In This Document. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   4.  The Internet-Standard Management Framework . . . . . . . . . .  3
   5.  Outline. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
       5.1.  mplsFTNTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
             5.1.1.  Advantages of Address Ranges Over CIDR Prefixes.  4
       5.2.  mplsFTNMapTable. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
             5.2.1.  Indexing Requirements. . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
             5.2.2.  How the Current Indexing Works . . . . . . . . .  5
       5.3.  mplsFTNPerfTable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   6.  Avoiding Retrieval-Modification Interactions . . . . . . . . .  7



Nadeau, et al.              Standards Track
Next >