VRRP-MIB

1
VRRP-MIB

• Kalyan Tata
• Kripakaran karlekar
• Brian R. Jewell

2
Agenda

• Present structure of two options
• Discuss options for unified or multiple MIBs
• Known problems with Ids
• Questions/other problems with Ids.

3
Update RFC2787

• .mib2(1)
• vrrpMIB(68)
• vrrpNotifications(0)
• vrrpTrapNewMaster(1)
• vrrpTrapAuthFailure(2)
• vrrpOperations(1)
• vrrpOperAuthType
• vrrpOperAuthKey
• vrrpStatistics(2)
• vrrpStatsAuthFailures
• vrrpStatsInvalidAuthType
• vrrpStatsAuthTypeMismatch
• vrrpConformance(3)

4
New MIB for VRRP over IPv6

• .mib2(1)
• vrrpIpv6MIB(XXX)
• vrrpIpv6Notifications(0)
• vrrpIpv6TrapNewMaster(1)
• vrrpIpv6TrapProtoError(2)
• vrrpIpv6Operations(1)
• vrrpIpv6NodeVersion(1)
• vrrpIpv6NotificationCntl(2)
• vrrpIpv6OperTable
• vrrpIpv6Statistics(2)
• vrrpIpv6RouterChecksumErrors(1)
• vrrpIpv6RouterVersionErrors(2)
• vrrpIpv6RouterVrIdErrors(3)
• vrrpIpv6RouterStatsTable(4)
• vrrpIpv6Conformance(3)
• vrrpIpv6MIBCompliances(1)
• vrrpIpv6MIBGroups(2)

5
Unified MIB Structure

• .mib2(1)
• vrrpMIB(68)
• vrrpNotifications(0)
• vrrpTrapNewMaster(1)
• vrrpTrapAuthFailure(2)
• vrrpTrapProtoError(3)
• vrrpOperations(1)
• vrrpNodeVersion(1)
• vrrpNotificationCntl(2)
• vrrpOperTable
• vrrpAssoIpAddrTable(4)
• vrrpUniOperTable
• vrrpUniAssoIpAddrTable(4)
• vrrpStatistics(2)
• vrrpRouterChecksumErrors(1)
• vrrpRouterVersionErrors(2)
• vrrpRouterVrIdErrors(3)
• vrrpRouterStatsTable(4)
• vrrpConformance(3)

6
Arguments For Separate MIBs

• RFC 2787 is widely implemented.
• Existing implementations that do not foresee
  implementing VRRP for IPv6 should not require
  changes. Deprecating existing objects is easy to
  implement than implementing a whole new set of
  objects.
• VRRP for IPv6 is an independent protocol and
  hence should have a separate MIB.
• RFC - 3291
• MIB modules of the second type, which are
  inherently IP version specific, do not need to be
  redefined. Note that even in this case, any
  additions to these MIB modules or new IP version
  specific MIB modules SHOULD use the textual
  conventions defined in this memo.

7
Arguments For Unified MIB

• 80 of the objects can be shared across the
  protocols.
• VRRP for IPv4 has changed and hence need an
  update to the existing MIB. RFC 3291 Any updates
  should use the new InetAddress which will
  result in deprecating existing MIBs, hence why
  not add some more to the change and make it
  unified MIB.
• draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2011-update-04.txt ,
  draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2012-update-04.txt of IPv6 WG
  are following the similar approach of unified
  MIB.
• draft-ietf-ipv6-rfc2011-update-04.txt The
  IPV6-TCP-MIB defined in RFC 2452 has been moved
  to Historic since the approach of having separate
  IP version specific tables is not followed
  anymore. Implementation of RFC 2452 is thus not
  suggested anymore.
• It is better to update RFC2787 with InetAddress
  before we have too many implementations.

8
Known problems with IDs

• draft-ietf-vrrp-ipv6-mib-00.txt
• The MIB and ID boiler plates used in
  VRRP-IPv6-MIB need to be updated with current
  boiler plate.
• Add Security guidelines.
• Counter32 objects MUST state which timer object
  indicates discontinuity
• Read-create tables MUSt specify what the
  persistency behaviour is (eithr in DESCRIPTION
  clause or by adding StorageType object)
• Missing REVISION clause in MIB Module.
• draft-ietf-vrrp-unified-mib-00.txt
• MIB reused OIDs instead of deprecating existing
  tables and defining new tables.
• vrrpStatsIpTtlErrors, vrrpStatsHopLimitErrors are
  not required.

9
Known problems (cont.)

• Order of ifIndex, vrrpOperVrId should be
  switched in vrrpOperEntry.
• some of the many typos
• Page 15 This specifies the the type of
  inetAddress in.

10
Questions

• How many existing implementations are present for
  RFC2787?
• Which approach to take
• Unified MIB - I support this.
• Separate MIBs i will support if there is a
  strong reason.
• Next Step?