As per Relevance of the word obsolete, we have this rfc below:
Network Working Group F.
Request for Comments: 2096 Cisco
Obsoletes: 1354 January 1997
Category: Standards
IP Forwarding Table
Status of this
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited
Table of
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.
This memo defines an update to RFC 1354, "IP Forwarding Table MIB",
for Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR). That document
developed by the Router Requirements Working Group as an update
RFC 1213's ipRouteTable, with the display of multiple routes
a primary objective. The significant difference between this MIB
RFC 1354 is the recognition (explicitly discussed but by
left to future work) that CIDR routes may have
same network number but different network masks. Note that this
obsoletes a number of objects from RFC 1354. The reader should
careful attention to the STATUS field
Baker Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
2. The SNMP Network Management
The SNMP Network Management Framework presently consists of
major components. They are
o the SMI, described in RFC 1902 [1], - the mechanisms
for describing and naming objects for the purpose
management
o the MIB-II, STD 17, RFC 1213 [2], - the core set
managed objects for the Internet suite of protocols
o the protocol, RFC 1157 [6] and/or RFC 1905 [4], -
protocol for accessing managed information
Textual conventions are defined in RFC 1903 [3], and
statements are defined in RFC 1904 [5].
The Framework permits new objects to be defined for the purpose
experimentation and evaluation
2.1. Object
Managed objects are accessed via a virtual information store,
the Management Information Base or MIB. Objects in the
are defined using the subset of Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1)
defined in the SMI. In particular, each object object type is
by an OBJECT IDENTIFIER, an administratively assigned name.
object type together with an object instance serves to
identify a specific instantiation of the object.
human convenience, we often use a textual string, termed
descriptor, to refer to the object type
3.
The MIB consists of two tables and two global objects
(1) The object ipForwardNumber indicates the number
current routes. This is primarily to avoid having
read the table in order to determine this number
(2) The ipForwardTable updates the RFC 1213 ipRouteTable
display multipath IP Routes. This is in turn
by the ipCidrRouteTable
(3) The ipCidrRouteTable updates the RFC 1213 ipRouteTable
display multipath IP Routes having the same
number but differing network masks
Baker Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
4.
IP-FORWARD-MIB DEFINITIONS ::=
MODULE-IDENTITY, OBJECT-TYPE, IpAddress, Integer32, Gauge32
FROM SNMPv2-
FROM SNMPv2-
FROM RFC1213-
MODULE-COMPLIANCE, OBJECT-
FROM SNMPv2-CONF
ipForward MODULE-
LAST-UPDATED "9609190000Z" -- Thu Sep 26 16:34:47 PDT 1996
ORGANIZATION "IETF OSPF Working Group
CONTACT-
" Fred
Postal: Cisco
519 Lado
Santa Barbara, California 93111
Phone: +1 805 681 0115
Email: fred@cisco.
"
"The MIB module for the display of CIDR multipath IP Routes."
REVISION "9609190000Z
"Revisions made by the OSPF WG."
::= { ip 24 }
ipCidrRouteNumber OBJECT-
SYNTAX Gauge32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The number of current ipCidrRouteTable
that are not invalid."
::= { ipForward 3 }
-- IP CIDR Route
-- The IP CIDR Route Table obsoletes and replaces the
-- Table current in MIB-I and MIB-II and the IP Forwarding Table
-- It adds knowledge of the autonomous system of the next hop
-- multiple next hops, and policy routing, and
Baker Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
-- Inter-Domain Routing
ipCidrRouteTable OBJECT-
SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF
MAX-ACCESS not-
STATUS
"This entity's IP Routing table."
"RFC 1213 Section 6.6, The IP Group
::= { ipForward 4 }
ipCidrRouteEntry OBJECT-
SYNTAX
MAX-ACCESS not-
STATUS
"A particular route to a particular destina
tion, under a particular policy."
INDEX {
ipCidrRouteDest
ipCidrRouteMask
ipCidrRouteTos
}
::= { ipCidrRouteTable 1 }
IpCidrRouteEntry ::=
SEQUENCE {
IpAddress
IpAddress
Integer32,
IpAddress
Integer32,
INTEGER
INTEGER
Integer32,
OBJECT IDENTIFIER
Baker Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
Integer32,
ipCidrRouteMetric
Integer32,
ipCidrRouteMetric
Integer32,
ipCidrRouteMetric
Integer32,
ipCidrRouteMetric
Integer32,
ipCidrRouteMetric
Integer32,
}
ipCidrRouteDest OBJECT-
SYNTAX
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The destination IP address of this route
This object may not take a Multicast (Class D
address value
Any assignment (implicit or otherwise) of
instance of this object to a value x must
rejected if the bitwise logical-AND of x
the value of the corresponding instance of
ipCidrRouteMask object is not equal to x."
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 1 }
ipCidrRouteMask OBJECT-
SYNTAX
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"Indicate the mask to be logical-ANDed with
destination address before being compared
the value in the ipCidrRouteDest field.
those systems that do not support
subnet masks, an agent constructs the value
the ipCidrRouteMask by reference to the IP Ad
dress Class
Any assignment (implicit or otherwise) of
instance of this object to a value x must
rejected if the bitwise logical-AND of x
Baker Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
the value of the corresponding instance of
ipCidrRouteDest object is not equal to ipCidrRoute
Dest."
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 2 }
-- The following convention is included for
-- of TOS Field contents. At this time, the Host
-- and the Router Requirements documents disagree on the
-- of the TOS field. This mapping describes the
-- Requirements mapping, and leaves room to widen the TOS
-- without impact to fielded systems
ipCidrRouteTos OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The policy specifier is the IP TOS Field. The
of IP TOS is as specified by the following convention
Zero indicates the default path if no more
policy applies
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| | | |
| PRECEDENCE | TYPE OF SERVICE | 0 |
| | | |
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
IP TOS IP
Field Policy Field
Contents Code Contents
0 0 0 0 ==> 0 0 0 0 1 ==> 2
0 0 1 0 ==> 4 0 0 1 1 ==> 6
0 1 0 0 ==> 8 0 1 0 1 ==> 10
0 1 1 0 ==> 12 0 1 1 1 ==> 14
1 0 0 0 ==> 16 1 0 0 1 ==> 18
1 0 1 0 ==> 20 1 0 1 1 ==> 22
1 1 0 0 ==> 24 1 1 0 1 ==> 26
1 1 1 0 ==> 28 1 1 1 1 ==> 30"
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 3 }
ipCidrRouteNextHop OBJECT-
SYNTAX
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"On remote routes, the address of the next sys
tem en route; Otherwise, 0.0.0.0."
Baker Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 4 }
ipCidrRouteIfIndex OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The ifIndex value which identifies the
interface through which the next hop of
route should be reached."
DEFVAL { 0 }
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 5 }
ipCidrRouteType OBJECT-
SYNTAX INTEGER {
other (1), -- not specified by this
reject (2), -- route which discards
local (3), -- local
remote (4) -- remote
}
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The type of route. Note that local(3)
to a route for which the next hop is the
destination; remote(4) refers to a route
which the next hop is not the final destina
tion
Routes which do not result in traffic forwarding
rejection should not be displayed even if
implementation keeps them stored internally
reject (2) refers to a route which, if matched,
the message as unreachable. This is used in
protocols as a means of correctly aggregating routes."
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 6 }
ipCidrRouteProto OBJECT-
SYNTAX INTEGER {
other (1), -- not
local (2), -- local
netmgmt (3), -- static
icmp (4), -- result of ICMP
-- the following are all
-- routing
Baker Standards Track [Page 7]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
egp (5), -- Exterior Gateway
ggp (6), -- Gateway-Gateway
hello (7), -- FuzzBall
rip (8), -- Berkeley RIP or RIP-
isIs (9), -- Dual IS-
esIs (10), -- ISO 9542
ciscoIgrp (11), -- Cisco
bbnSpfIgp (12), -- BBN SPF
ospf (13), -- Open Shortest Path
bgp (14), -- Border Gateway
idpr (15), -- InterDomain Policy
ciscoEigrp (16) -- Cisco
}
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The routing mechanism via which this route
learned. Inclusion of values for gateway rout
ing protocols is not intended to imply
hosts should support those protocols."
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 7 }
ipCidrRouteAge OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The number of seconds since this route
last updated or otherwise determined to
correct. Note that no semantics of `too old
can be implied except through knowledge of
routing protocol by which the route
learned."
DEFVAL { 0 }
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 8 }
ipCidrRouteInfo OBJECT-
SYNTAX OBJECT
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"A reference to MIB definitions specific to
particular routing protocol which is responsi
ble for this route, as determined by the
specified in the route's ipCidrRouteProto value
If this information is not present, its
should be set to the OBJECT IDENTIFIER { 0 0 },
which is a syntactically valid object identif
Baker Standards Track [Page 8]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
ier, and any implementation conforming to ASN.1
and the Basic Encoding Rules must be able
generate and recognize this value."
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 9 }
ipCidrRouteNextHopAS OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The Autonomous System Number of the Next Hop
The semantics of this object are determined
the routing-protocol specified in the route'
ipCidrRouteProto value. When this object
unknown or not relevant its value should be
to zero."
DEFVAL { 0 }
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 10 }
ipCidrRouteMetric1 OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The primary routing metric for this route
The semantics of this metric are determined
the routing-protocol specified in the route'
ipCidrRouteProto value. If this metric is
used, its value should be set to -1."
DEFVAL { -1 }
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 11 }
ipCidrRouteMetric2 OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"An alternate routing metric for this route
The semantics of this metric are determined
the routing-protocol specified in the route'
ipCidrRouteProto value. If this metric is
used, its value should be set to -1."
DEFVAL { -1 }
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 12 }
ipCidrRouteMetric3 OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
Baker Standards Track [Page 9]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
STATUS
"An alternate routing metric for this route
The semantics of this metric are determined
the routing-protocol specified in the route'
ipCidrRouteProto value. If this metric is
used, its value should be set to -1."
DEFVAL { -1 }
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 13 }
ipCidrRouteMetric4 OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"An alternate routing metric for this route
The semantics of this metric are determined
the routing-protocol specified in the route'
ipCidrRouteProto value. If this metric is
used, its value should be set to -1."
DEFVAL { -1 }
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 14 }
ipCidrRouteMetric5 OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"An alternate routing metric for this route
The semantics of this metric are determined
the routing-protocol specified in the route'
ipCidrRouteProto value. If this metric is
used, its value should be set to -1."
DEFVAL { -1 }
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 15 }
ipCidrRouteStatus OBJECT-
SYNTAX
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The row status variable, used according
row installation and removal conventions."
::= { ipCidrRouteEntry 16 }
-- conformance
ipForwardConformance OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { ipForward 5 }
Baker Standards Track [Page 10]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
ipForwardGroups OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { ipForwardConformance 1 }
ipForwardCompliances OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { ipForwardConformance 2 }
-- compliance
ipForwardCompliance MODULE-
STATUS
"The compliance statement for SNMPv2
which implement the ipForward MIB."
MODULE -- this
MANDATORY-GROUPS { ipForwardCidrRouteGroup }
::= { ipForwardCompliances 1 }
-- units of
ipForwardCidrRouteGroup OBJECT-
OBJECTS { ipCidrRouteNumber
ipCidrRouteDest, ipCidrRouteMask, ipCidrRouteTos
ipCidrRouteNextHop, ipCidrRouteIfIndex, ipCidrRouteType
ipCidrRouteProto, ipCidrRouteAge, ipCidrRouteInfo
ipCidrRouteNextHopAS, ipCidrRouteMetric1,
ipCidrRouteMetric2, ipCidrRouteMetric3,
ipCidrRouteMetric4, ipCidrRouteMetric5,
}
STATUS
"The CIDR Route Table."
::= { ipForwardGroups 3 }
-- Obsoleted Definitions -
ipForwardNumber OBJECT-
SYNTAX Gauge32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The number of current ipForwardTable
that are not invalid."
::= { ipForward 1 }
-- IP Forwarding
-- The IP Forwarding Table obsoletes and replaces the
-- Table current in MIB-I and MIB-II. It adds knowledge
-- the autonomous system of the next hop, multiple next
Baker Standards Track [Page 11]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
-- support, and policy routing support
ipForwardTable OBJECT-
SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF
MAX-ACCESS not-
STATUS
"This entity's IP Routing table."
"RFC 1213 Section 6.6, The IP Group
::= { ipForward 2 }
ipForwardEntry OBJECT-
SYNTAX
MAX-ACCESS not-
STATUS
"A particular route to a particular destina
tion, under a particular policy."
INDEX {
ipForwardDest
ipForwardProto
ipForwardPolicy
}
::= { ipForwardTable 1 }
IpForwardEntry ::=
SEQUENCE {
IpAddress
IpAddress
Integer32,
IpAddress
Integer32,
INTEGER
INTEGER
Integer32,
OBJECT IDENTIFIER
Baker Standards Track [Page 12]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
Integer32,
ipForwardMetric
Integer32,
ipForwardMetric
Integer32,
ipForwardMetric
Integer32,
ipForwardMetric
Integer32,
ipForwardMetric
Integer32
}
ipForwardDest OBJECT-
SYNTAX
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The destination IP address of this route.
entry with a value of 0.0.0.0 is considered
default route
This object may not take a Multicast (Class D
address value
Any assignment (implicit or otherwise) of
instance of this object to a value x must
rejected if the bitwise logical-AND of x
the value of the corresponding instance of
ipForwardMask object is not equal to x."
::= { ipForwardEntry 1 }
ipForwardMask OBJECT-
SYNTAX
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"Indicate the mask to be logical-ANDed with
destination address before being compared
the value in the ipForwardDest field.
those systems that do not support
subnet masks, an agent constructs the value
the ipForwardMask by reference to the IP Ad
dress Class
Any assignment (implicit or otherwise) of
instance of this object to a value x must
rejected if the bitwise logical-AND of x
Baker Standards Track [Page 13]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
the value of the corresponding instance of
ipForwardDest object is not equal to ipForward
Dest."
DEFVAL { '00000000'h } -- 0.0.0.0
::= { ipForwardEntry 2 }
-- The following convention is included for
-- of TOS Field contents. At this time, the Host
-- and the Router Requirements documents disagree on the
-- of the TOS field. This mapping describes the
-- Requirements mapping, and leaves room to widen the TOS
-- without impact to fielded systems
ipForwardPolicy OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The general set of conditions that would
the selection of one multipath route (set
next hops for a given destination) is
to as 'policy'.
Unless the mechanism indicated by ipForwardPro
to specifies otherwise, the policy specifier
the IP TOS Field. The encoding of IP TOS is
specified by the following convention.
indicates the default path if no more
policy applies
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
| | | |
| PRECEDENCE | TYPE OF SERVICE | 0 |
| | | |
+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
IP TOS IP
Field Policy Field
Contents Code Contents
0 0 0 0 ==> 0 0 0 0 1 ==> 2
0 0 1 0 ==> 4 0 0 1 1 ==> 6
0 1 0 0 ==> 8 0 1 0 1 ==> 10
0 1 1 0 ==> 12 0 1 1 1 ==> 14
1 0 0 0 ==> 16 1 0 0 1 ==> 18
1 0 1 0 ==> 20 1 0 1 1 ==> 22
1 1 0 0 ==> 24 1 1 0 1 ==> 26
1 1 1 0 ==> 28 1 1 1 1 ==> 30
Baker Standards Track [Page 14]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
Protocols defining 'policy' otherwise must ei
ther define a set of values which are valid
this object or must implement an integer
instanced policy table for which this object'
value acts as an index."
::= { ipForwardEntry 3 }
ipForwardNextHop OBJECT-
SYNTAX
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"On remote routes, the address of the next sys
tem en route; Otherwise, 0.0.0.0."
::= { ipForwardEntry 4 }
ipForwardIfIndex OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The ifIndex value which identifies the
interface through which the next hop of
route should be reached."
DEFVAL { 0 }
::= { ipForwardEntry 5 }
ipForwardType OBJECT-
SYNTAX INTEGER {
other (1), -- not specified by this
invalid (2), -- logically
local (3), -- local
remote (4) -- remote
}
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The type of route. Note that local(3)
to a route for which the next hop is the
destination; remote(4) refers to a route
which the next hop is not the final destina
tion
Setting this object to the value invalid(2)
the effect of invalidating the
entry in the ipForwardTable object. That is
it effectively disassociates the
identified with said entry from the route iden
Baker Standards Track [Page 15]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
tified with said entry. It is
implementation-specific matter as to
the agent removes an invalidated entry from
table. Accordingly, management stations
be prepared to receive tabular information
agents that corresponds to entries not current
ly in use. Proper interpretation of such en
tries requires examination of the relevant ip
ForwardType object."
DEFVAL { invalid }
::= { ipForwardEntry 6 }
ipForwardProto OBJECT-
SYNTAX INTEGER {
other (1), -- not
local (2), -- local
netmgmt (3), -- static
icmp (4), -- result of ICMP
-- the following are all
-- routing
egp (5), -- Exterior Gateway
ggp (6), -- Gateway-Gateway
hello (7), -- FuzzBall
rip (8), -- Berkeley RIP or RIP-
is-is (9), -- Dual IS-
es-is (10), -- ISO 9542
ciscoIgrp (11), -- Cisco
bbnSpfIgp (12), -- BBN SPF
ospf (13), -- Open Shortest Path
bgp (14), -- Border Gateway
idpr (15) -- InterDomain Policy
}
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The routing mechanism via which this route
learned. Inclusion of values for gateway rout
ing protocols is not intended to imply
hosts should support those protocols."
::= { ipForwardEntry 7 }
ipForwardAge OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The number of seconds since this route
Baker Standards Track [Page 16]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
last updated or otherwise determined to
correct. Note that no semantics of `too old
can be implied except through knowledge of
routing protocol by which the route
learned."
DEFVAL { 0 }
::= { ipForwardEntry 8 }
ipForwardInfo OBJECT-
SYNTAX OBJECT
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"A reference to MIB definitions specific to
particular routing protocol which is responsi
ble for this route, as determined by the
specified in the route's ipForwardProto value
If this information is not present, its
should be set to the OBJECT IDENTIFIER { 0 0 },
which is a syntactically valid object identif
ier, and any implementation conforming to ASN.1
and the Basic Encoding Rules must be able
generate and recognize this value."
::= { ipForwardEntry 9 }
ipForwardNextHopAS OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The Autonomous System Number of the Next Hop
When this is unknown or not relevant to
protocol indicated by ipForwardProto, zero."
DEFVAL { 0 }
::= { ipForwardEntry 10 }
ipForwardMetric1 OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"The primary routing metric for this route
The semantics of this metric are determined
the routing-protocol specified in the route'
ipForwardProto value. If this metric is
used, its value should be set to -1."
DEFVAL { -1 }
::= { ipForwardEntry 11 }
Baker Standards Track [Page 17]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
ipForwardMetric2 OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"An alternate routing metric for this route
The semantics of this metric are determined
the routing-protocol specified in the route'
ipForwardProto value. If this metric is
used, its value should be set to -1."
DEFVAL { -1 }
::= { ipForwardEntry 12 }
ipForwardMetric3 OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"An alternate routing metric for this route
The semantics of this metric are determined
the routing-protocol specified in the route'
ipForwardProto value. If this metric is
used, its value should be set to -1."
DEFVAL { -1 }
::= { ipForwardEntry 13 }
ipForwardMetric4 OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"An alternate routing metric for this route
The semantics of this metric are determined
the routing-protocol specified in the route'
ipForwardProto value. If this metric is
used, its value should be set to -1."
DEFVAL { -1 }
::= { ipForwardEntry 14 }
ipForwardMetric5 OBJECT-
SYNTAX Integer32
MAX-ACCESS read-
STATUS
"An alternate routing metric for this route
The semantics of this metric are determined
the routing-protocol specified in the route'
Baker Standards Track [Page 18]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
ipForwardProto value. If this metric is
used, its value should be set to -1."
DEFVAL { -1 }
::= { ipForwardEntry 15 }
-- Obsoleted Definitions -
-- compliance
ipForwardOldCompliance MODULE-
STATUS
"The compliance statement for SNMP
which implement the ipForward MIB."
MODULE -- this
MANDATORY-GROUPS { ipForwardMultiPathGroup }
::= { ipForwardCompliances 2 }
ipForwardMultiPathGroup OBJECT-
OBJECTS { ipForwardNumber
ipForwardDest, ipForwardMask, ipForwardPolicy
ipForwardNextHop, ipForwardIfIndex, ipForwardType
ipForwardProto, ipForwardAge, ipForwardInfo
ipForwardNextHopAS
ipForwardMetric1, ipForwardMetric2, ipForwardMetric3,
ipForwardMetric4, ipForwardMetric
}
STATUS
"IP Multipath Route Table."
::= { ipForwardGroups 2 }
Baker Standards Track [Page 19]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
5.
This work was originally performed by the Router
Working Group at the request of the OSPF Working Group. This
was performed under the auspices of the OSPF Working Group. John
of Proteon Incorporated is the chair
6.
[1] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser
"Structure of Management Information for version 2 of
Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1442,
SNMP Research, Inc., Hughes LAN Systems, Dover
Consulting, Inc., Carnegie Mellon University, April 1993.
[2] Galvin, J., and K. McCloghrie, "Administrative Model
version 2 of the Simple Network Management
(SNMPv2)", RFC 1445, Trusted Information Systems,
LAN Systems, April 1993.
[3] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser
"Protocol Operations for version 2 of the Simple
Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1448, SNMP Research
Inc., Hughes LAN Systems, Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.,
Carnegie Mellon University, April 1993.
[4] McCloghrie, K., and M. Rose, "Management Information
for Network Management of TCP/IP-based internets - MIB
II", STD 17, RFC 1213, Hughes LAN Systems,
Systems International, March 1991.
[5] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791,
USC/Information Sciences Institute, September 1981.
[6] Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M., and S. Waldbusser
"Textual Conventions for version 2 of the Simple
Management Protocol (SNMPv2)", RFC 1443, SNMP Research
Inc., Hughes LAN Systems, Dover Beach Consulting, Inc.,
Carnegie Mellon University, April 1993.
[7] Baker, F., "IP Forwarding Table MIB", RFC 1354, July 1992.
Baker Standards Track [Page 20]
RFC 2096 IP Forwarding Table MIB January 1997
7. Security
Security is an objective not in this MIB view
8. Author's
Fred
Cisco
519 Lado
Santa Barbara, California 93111
Phone: +1 805 681 0115
EMail: fred@cisco.
Baker Standards Track [Page 21]
if you see any problems within the linking, don't worry be happy,
this is version 0.1 of the Relevance System and you gotta expect some crappy subroutines sometimes,
just be content we did not write this in Java, which would have made this "bigger and better" HAHAHHA.
RFC documents can be found at I.E.T.F.
Relevance System Copyright © 2002 Spectrum WorldResearch
other technical nosh by ServerMasters Corporation
collaboration of BobX
