GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc1189

Network Working Working Group U. Warrier Request for Comments: 1189 Netlabs Obsoletes: RFC 1095 L. Besaw

                                                       Hewlett-Packard
                                                            L. LaBarre
                                                 The Mitre Corporation
                                                        B. Handspicker
                                         Digital Equipment Corporation
                                                          October 1990
            The Common Management Information Services
                   and Protocols for the Internet
                          (CMOT and CMIP)

Status of this Memo

 This memo defines a network management architecture that uses the
 International Organization for Standardization's (ISO) Common
 Management Information Services/Common Management Information
 Protocol (CMIS/CMIP) in the Internet.  This RFC specifies an IAB
 standards track protocol for the Internet community, and requests
 discussion and suggestions for improvements.  Please refer to the
 current edition of the "IAB Official Protocol Standards" for the
 standardization state and status of this protocol.
 Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Table of Contents

 1. Overview ...................................................    2
 2. Introduction ...............................................    3
 3. Protocol Overview ..........................................    4
 3.1. The CMOT Protocol Suite ..................................    5
 3.2. The CMIP Protocol Suite ..................................    6
 3.3. Conformance Requirements .................................    6
 4. Common Management Information Service Element ..............    7
 4.1. Association Policies .....................................    7
 4.2. CMIS Services ............................................    9
 4.2.1 General Agreements on Users of CMIS .....................    9
 4.2.2 Specific Agreements on Users of CMIS ....................   10
 4.3. CMIP Agreements ..........................................   10
 5. Services Required by CMIP ..................................   10
 6. Acknowledgements ...........................................   11
 7. References .................................................   11
 8. Security Considerations.....................................   14
 9. Authors' Addresses..........................................   14

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 1] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

1. Overview

 This memo is a revision of RFC 1095 - "The Common Management
 Information Services and Protocol over TCP/IP" [27].  It defines a
 network management architecture that uses the International
 Organization for Standardization's (ISO) Common Management
 Information Services/Common Management Information Protocol
 (CMIS/CMIP) in the Internet.  This architecture provides a means by
 which control and monitoring information can be exchanged between a
 manager and a remote network element.  In particular, this memo
 defines the means for implementing the International Standard (IS)
 version of CMIS/CMIP on top of both IP-based and OSI-based Internet
 transport protocols for the purpose of carrying management
 information defined in the Internet-standard management information
 base.  Together with the relevant ISO standards and the companion
 RFCs that describe the initial structure of management information
 and management information base, these documents provide the basis
 for a comprehensive architecture and system for managing both IP-
 based and OSI-based internets, and in particular the Internet.
 In creating this revision of RFC 1095, the following technical and
 editorial changes were made:
    1) The tutorial section on OSI Management included in RFC 1095
       has been removed from this document.  After some revisions,
       the tutorial material may be published as another RFC.
    2) The sections in RFC 1095 which discussed the semantics of how
       to interpret requests in the context of Internet MIBs has been
       removed from this protocol document.  This topic is now
       discussed in the OIM-MIB-II draft document.  This protocol
       should be useable with MIB-I or MIB-II.  But, it will also be
       able to exploit the new features of the OIM-MIB-II.
    3) This document is based on the final International Standards
       for CMIS/CMIP (ISO 9595/9596) rather than the Draft
       International Standards.
    4) Many of the original agreements defined in RFC 1095 have been
       accepted and included in the OIW NMSIG implementers agreements.
       Rather than duplicating these agreements, they have been removed
       from this memo.  This document should be read in conjunction
       with ISO 9595/9596 (CMIS/CMIP) and the OIW Stable Agreements
       document.
    5) The Association Negotiation describe in RFC 1095 has been
       changed to align with current international and national
       agreements.  But, it has retained backwards compatibility with

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 2] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

       the assignment of an Application Context Name which is identical
       to the Application Context Name specified in RFC 1095.

2. Introduction

 This memo is the output of the OSI Internet Management Working Group
 of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).  As directed by the
 Internet Activites Board (IAB) in RFC 1052, it addresses the need for
 a long-term network management system based on ISO CMIS/CMIP.  This
 memo contains a set of protocol agreements for implementing a network
 management system based on these ISO Management standards.  Now that
 CMIS/CMIP has been voted an International Standard (IS), it has
 become a stable basis for product development.  This profile
 specifies how to apply CMIP to management of both IP-based and OSI-
 based Internet networks.  Network management using ISO CMIP to manage
 IP-based networks will be refered to as "CMIP Over TCP/IP" (CMOT).
 Network management using ISO CMIP to manage OSI-based networks will
 be refered to as "CMIP".  This memo specifies the protocol agreements
 necessary to implement CMIP and accompanying ISO protocols over OSI,
 TCP and UDP transport protocols.
 This memo must be read in conjunction with ISO and Internet documents
 defining specific protocol standards.  Documents defining the
 following ISO standards are required for the implementor: Abstract
 Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) [5, 6], Association Control (ACSE) [7,
 8], Remote Operations (ROSE) [9, 10], Common Management Information
 Services (CMIS) [11] and Common Management Information Protocol
 (CMIP) [12] with their addenda [32-35].  The specification of a
 lightweight presentation layer protocol is required for use with the
 CMOT section of this profile (see RFC 1085 [13]).  The SMI (see RFC
 1065 [2]), the MIB-I (see RFC 1066 [3]), the MIB-II (see RFC 1156
 [28]), and the OIM-MIB-II (see [29]) are used with this management
 system.
 This memo is divided into sections for each of the protocols for
 which implementors' agreements are needed: CMISE, ACSE, ROSE, and,
 for CMOT, the lightweight presentation protocol.  The protocol
 profile defined in this memo draws on the technical work of the OSI
 Network Management Forum [14] and the Network Management Special
 Interest Group (NMSIG) of the National Institute of Standards and
 Technology (NIST) (formerly the National Bureau of Standards) [30].
 Wherever possible, an attempt has been made to either directly
 reference or remain consistent with the protocol agreements reached
 by these groups.

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 3] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

3. Protocol Overview

 This part of the document is a specification of the protocols of the
 OIM architecture.  Contained herein are the agreements required to
 implement interoperable network management systems using these
 protocols.  The protocol suite defined by these implementors'
 agreements will facilitate communication between equipment of
 different vendors, suppliers, and networks.  This will allow the
 emergence of powerful multivendor network management based on ISO
 models and protocols.
 The choice of a set of protocol standards together with further
 agreements needed to implement those standards is commonly referred
 to as a "profile."  The selection policy for this profile is to use
 existing standards from the international standards community (ISO
 and CCITT) and the Internet community.  Existing ISO standards and
 draft standards in the area of OSI network management form the basis
 of this profile.  Other ISO application layer standards (ROSE and
 ACSE) are used to support the ISO management protocol (CMIP).  To
 ensure interoperability, certain choices and restrictions are made
 here concerning various options and parameters provided by these
 standards.   Internet standards are used to provide the underlying
 network transport.  These agreements provide a precise statement of
 the implementation choices made for implementing ISO network
 management standards in IP-based and OSI-based internets.
 In addition to the OIM working group, there are at least two other
 bodies actively engaged in defining profiles for interoperable OSI
 network management: the OSI Implementors Workshop (OIW) and the OSI
 Network Management Forum.  Both of these groups are similar to the
 OIM working group in that they are each defining profiles for using
 ISO standards for network management.  Both differ in that they are
 specifying the use only of underlying ISO protocols, while the OIM
 working group is concerned with using OSI management in both OSI and
 TCP/IP networks.  In the interest of greater future compatibility,
 the OIM working group has attempted to make this profile conform as
 closely as possible to the ongoing work of these two bodies.
 This section will describe the CMOT Protocol Suite, the CMIP Protocol
 Suite and Conformance Requirements common to both CMOT and CMIP.
 Later sections will specify the implementers agreements for specific
 layer protocols that comprise the CMOT and CMIP Protocol Suites.

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 4] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

3.1. The CMOT Protocol Suite

 The following seven protocols compose the CMOT protocol suite: ISO
 ACSE, ISO DIS ROSE, ISO CMIP, the lightweight presentation protocol
 (LPP), UDP, TCP, and IP.  The relation of these protocols to each
 other is briefly summarized in Figure 2.
               +----------------------------------------------+
                       Management Application Processes
               +----------------------------------------------+
                           +-------------------+
                                   CMISE
                               ISO 9595/9596
                           +-------------------+
               +------------------+       +--------------------+
                        ACSE                       ROSE
                 ISO IS 8649/8650           ISO DIS 9072-1/2
               +------------------+       +--------------------+
               +-----------------------------------------------+
                     Lightweight Presentation Protocol (LPP)
                                   RFC 1085
               +-----------------------------------------------+
               +------------------+       +--------------------+
                       TCP                         UDP
                     RFC 793                     RFC 768
               +------------------+       +--------------------+
               +-----------------------------------------------+
                                     IP
                                   RFC 791
               +-----------------------------------------------+
                    Figure 2.  The CMOT Protocol Suite

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 5] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

3.2. The CMIP Protocol Suite

 The following six protocols compose the CMIP protocol suite: ISO
 ACSE, ISO DIS ROSE, ISO CMIP, ISO Presentation, ISO  Session and ISO
 Transport.  The relation of these protocols to each other is briefly
 summarized in Figure 3.
               +----------------------------------------------+
                       Management Application Processes
               +----------------------------------------------+
                           +-------------------+
                                   CMISE
                               ISO 9595/9596
                           +-------------------+
               +------------------+       +--------------------+
                        ACSE                       ROSE
                   ISO 8649/8650            ISO DIS 9072-1/2
               +------------------+       +--------------------+
               +-----------------------------------------------+
                              ISO Presentation
                                  ISO
               +-----------------------------------------------+
               +-----------------------------------------------+
                              ISO Session
                                  ISO
               +-----------------------------------------------+
               +-----------------------------------------------+
                              ISO Transport
                                  ISO
               +-----------------------------------------------+
                    Figure 3.  The CMIP Protocol Suite

3.3. Conformance Requirements

 A CMOT-conformant system must implement the following protocols:
 ACSE, ROSE, CMIP, LPP, and IP.  A CMOT-conformant system must support
 the use of the LPP over either UDP or TCP.  The use of the LPP over
 both UDP and TCP on the same system may be supported.
 A CMIP-conformant system must implement the following protocols:
 ACSE, ROSE, CMIP, ISO Presentation, ISO Session and ISO Transport.

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 6] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

4. Common Management Information Service Element

 The Common Management Information Service Element (CMISE) is
 specified in two ISO documents.  The service definition for the
 Common Management Information Service (CMIS) is given in ISO 9595
 [11].  The protocol specification for the Common Management
 Information Protocol (CMIP) is found in ISO 9596 [12].  In addition,
 the addenda for add/remove support in M-SET [32, 34] must be
 supported for both CMOT and CMIP.  The addenda for M-CANCEL-GET [33,
 35] may be supported by an implementation, but it's use is negotiated
 as part of association negotiation.

4.1. Association Policies

 The following ACSE services are required by CMISE: A-ASSOCIATE, A-
 RELEASE, A-ABORT, and A-P-ABORT.  The rest of the CMIP protocol uses
 the RO-INVOKE, RO-RESULT, RO-ERROR, and RO-REJECT services of ROSE.
 There are four types of association that may be negotiated between
 managing and managed systems.  These types are:
    Event               M-EVENT-REPORTs may be sent by the
                        managed system; no other CMIP PDUs
                        are allowed
    Event/Monitor       same as Event type except that, in
                        addition, the managing system may
                        also issue M-GET requests and
                        receive M-GET responses over the
                        association
    Monitor/Control     managing system may issue M-GET,
                        M-SET, M-CREATE, M-DELETE and
                        M-ACTION requests over the
                        association; no event reporting is
                        allowed
    Full Mgr/Agent      all functions must be supported
 A conformant system  must support at least one of these Association
 types.  Note that a system may play both managing and managed system
 roles, but not on the same association.
 The negotiation process uses the A-ASSOCIATE and A-RELEASE services.
 Application Context Name is used to determine the requestor's "role"
 in an association (as managing or managed system) and to determine
 the type of the association.

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 7] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

 The following values for Application Context Name are registered for
 for CMOT and CMIP:
    {iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6)
         internet(1) mgmt(2) mib(1) oim(9) acn(1)
         cmot1095(1)}
         (for backwards compatible negotiation with RFC 1095 CMOT
         implementations)
    {iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6)
         internet(1) mgmt(2) mib(1) oim(9) acn(1)
         manager-event-association(2)}
    {iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6)
         internet(1) mgmt(2) mib(1) oim(9) acn(1)
         manager-event-monitor-association(3)}
    {iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6)
         internet(1) mgmt(2) mib(1) oim(9) acn(1)
         manager-monitor-control-association(4)}
    {iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6)
         internet(1) mgmt(2) mib(1) oim(9) acn(1)
         manager-full-association(5)}
    {iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6)
         internet(1) mgmt(2) mib(1) oim(9) acn(1)
         agent-event-association(6)}
 The following negotiation rules are to be used:
    1.   A managed system may only request an Event
         association and, in fact, must create an Event
         association if it has an event to report and no
         suitable association already exists.
    2.   Managing systems may request any association type.
    3.   An association is created by the requesting system
         issuing an A-ASSOCIATE request with the
         requestor's AE-TITLE and the desired application
         context.  The responding system then returns
         either 1) an A-ASSOCIATE response with the
         requestor's AE-TITLE and the application context
         which it wishes to accept or 2) an A-ASSOCIATE
         response rejecting the association.

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 8] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

    4.   Managed systems may negotiate "downward" from
         Full to Monitor/Control, Event/Monitor or Event by
         returning the new application context in the
         A-ASSOCIATE response to the managing system during
         the association creation process.  In the same
         fashion, managed systems may negotiate from
         Event/Monitor to Event.
    5.   When a managing system receives an application
         context in an A-ASSOCIATE response that differs
         from the context sent in an A-ASSOCIATE request it
         may either proceed with the new context or refuse
         the new context by issuing an A-RELEASE request.
 A-RELEASE is used when the requestor does not agree with the new
 context.  A-ABORT is used for invalid negotiation.  If A-ABORT were
 to be used to terminate an association, there exists the potential
 for loss of information, such as pending events or confirmations.
 A-ABORT must be used, however, when a protocol violation occurs or
 where an association is not yet established.

4.2. CMIS Services

4.2.1 General Agreements on Users of CMIS

 The general agreements on users of CMIS shall be as specified in the
 OIW Stable Agreements [30] section 18.6.2.
 The following additional agreements are specified.
    o A system need only implement the services and service
      primitives required for the association types (section 4.1)
      that it supports.
    o Current/Event times shall be fields shall use 1 millisecond
      granularity.  If the system generating the PDU does not have
      the current time, yet does have the time since last boot, then
      GeneralizedTime can be used to encode this information.  The
      time since last boot will be added to the base time "0001
      Jan 1 00:00:00.00" using the Gregorian calendar algorithm.
      (In the Gregorian calendar, all years have 365 days except
      those divisible by 4 and not by 400, which have 366.)  The use
      of the year 1 as the base year will prevent any confusion
      with current time.
      If no meaningful time is available, then the year 0 shall be
      used in GeneralizedTime to indicate this fact.

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 9] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

4.2.2 Specific Agreements on Users of CMIS

 The specific agreements on users of CMIS shall be as specified in the
 OIW Stable Agreements [30] section 18.6.3.
 The following additional agreements are specified:
    o Event time shall be mandatory for all events.
    o  Both the "managed Object Class" and "managed Object
       Instance" parameters must be present in the following CMIS
       Service Response/Confirmation primitives: the
       M-EVENT-REPORT Confirmed, the M-GET, the M-SET, the
       M-ACTION, the M-CREATE, and the M-DELETE.

4.3. CMIP Agreements

 The CMIS and CMIP implementers agreements documented in the OIW
 Stable Implementers Agreements [30] plus those mandated by the CMIP
 standard will be used for both CMOT and CMIP.  In addition to these
 implementers agreements, the following specific agreements must be
 observed:
    o An implementation is required to support all filter items
      except subsetOf, supersetOf, nonNullSetIntersection, and
      substrings.
    o The "managedObjectInstance" field must be present in the
      ProcessingFailure Error PDU.  The "managedObjectClass"
      field must be present in the NoSuchArgument Error PDU.
 [Temporary Note:  The CMIS/P implementers agreements have reach a
 fairly stable status in the OIW working agreements document.  It is
 expected that the CMIS/P agreements (18.6.2 and 18.6.3) will be
 recommended to be moved into the stable agreements document during
 either the June 1990 meetings.  Reference [30] points to the presumed
 June 1990 updated version of the stable agreements document.]

5. Services Required by CMIP

 The services required by CMIP shall be as specified in the OIW Stable
 Implementors Agreements [30] section 18.6.5.
 The following additional agreements are specified:
    o ASCE Requirements:  Application contexts shall be as defined
      in section 4.1 of these agreements.  The values and defaults

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 10] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

      of parameters to the ACSE parameters given to the presentation
      service are specified in RFC 1085 [13] for CMOT and in the NIST
      Stable Implementers Agreements [30] for CMIP.
    o Presentation Requirements:  CMOT implementations shall be
      supported by the Lightweight Presentation Protocol (LPP)
      [13].  The LPP may use either TCP or UDP.  When UDP is used,
      an implementation need not accept LPP PDUs whose length
      exceeds 484 octets.
    o Session Requirements:  CMOT implementations will not
      require the session protocol.

6. Acknowledgements

 This RFC is the result of the work of many people.  The following
 members of the IETF OSI Internet Management and preceding Netman
 working groups made important contributions:
           Amatzia Ben-Artzi, Synoptics
           Asheem Chandna, AT&T Bell Laboratories
           Ken Chapman, Digital Equipment Corporation
           Anthony Chung, Sytek
           George Cohn, Ungermann-Bass
           Gabriele Cressman, Sun Microsystems
           Tom Halcin, Hewlett-Packard
           Pranati Kapadia, Hewlett-Packard
           Lee LaBarre, The MITRE Corporation (co-chair)
           Dave Mackie, 3Com
           Keith McCloghrie, Hughes/InterLan
           Jim Robertson, 3Com
           Milt Roselinsky, CMC
           Marshall Rose, PSI
           John Scott, Data General
           Lou Steinberg, IBM

7. References

 [1] Cerf, V., "IAB Recommendations for the Development of Internet
     Network Management Standards", RFC 1052, IAB, April 1988.
 [2] Rose, M., and K. McCloghrie, "Structure and Identification of
     Management Information for TCP/IP-based internets", RFC 1065,
     TWG, August 1988.
 [3] McCloghrie, K., and M. Rose, "Management Information Base for
     Network Management of TCP/IP-based internets", RFC 1066, TWG,
     August 1988.

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 11] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

 [4] Case, J., M. Fedor, M. Schoffstall, and J. Davin, "A Simple
     Network Management Protocol (SNMP)", RFC 1098, (Obsoletes RFC
     1067), University of Tennessee at Knoxville, NYSERNet, Inc.,
     Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, MIT Laboratory for Computer
     Science, April 1989.
 [5] ISO 8824: "Information Processing Systems - Open Systems
     Interconnection, Specification of Abstract Syntax Notation One
     (ASN.1)", Geneva, March 1988.
 [6] ISO 8825: "Information Processing Systems - Open Systems
     Interconnection, Specification of Basic Encoding Rules for
     Abstract Notation One (ASN.1)", Geneva, March 1988.
 [7] ISO 8649: "Information Processing Systems - Open Systems
     Interconnection, Service Definition for Association Control
     Service Element".
 [8] ISO 8650: "Information Processing Systems - Open Systems
     Interconnection, Protocol Specification for Association Control
     Service Element".
 [9] CCITT Recommendation X.219, Working Document for ISO 9072-1:
     "Information processing systems - Text Communication, Remote
     Operations: Model, Notation and Service Definition", Gloucester,
     November 1987.
[10] CCITT Recommendation X.229, Working Document for ISO 9072-2:
     "Information processing systems - Text Communication, Remote
     Operations: Protocol Specification", Gloucester, November 1987.
[11] ISO 9595: "Information Processing Systems - Open Systems
     Interconnection, Management Information Service Definition - Part
     2: Common Management Information Service", 22 December 1988.
[12] ISO 9596: "Information Processing Systems - Open Systems
     Interconnection, Management Information Protocol Specification -
     Part 2: Common Management Information Protocol", 22 December
     1988.
[13] Rose, M., "ISO Presentation Services on top of TCP/IP-based
     internets", RFC 1085, TWG, December 1988.
[14] OSI Network Management Forum, "Forum Interoperable Interface
     Protocols", September 1988.
[15] ISO DIS 7498-4: "Information Processing Systems - Open Systems
     Interconnection, Basic Reference Model - Part 4: OSI Management

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 12] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

     Framework".
[16] ISO/IEC JTC1/SC21/WG4 N571: "Information Processing Systems -
     Open Systems Interconnection, Systems Management: Overview",
     London, July 1988.
[17] Klerer, S. Mark, "The OSI Management Architecture: An Overview",
     IEEE Network Magazine, March 1988.
[18] Ben-Artzi, A., "Network Management for TCP/IP Networks: An
     Overview", Internet Engineering Task Force working note, April
     1988.
[19] ISO/IEC JTC1/SC21/WG4 N3324: "Information Processing Pystems -
     Open Systems Interconnection, Management Information Services -
     Structure of Management Information - Part I: Management
     Information Model", Sydney, December 1988.
[20] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", RFC 768, USC/Information
     Sciences Institute, August 1980.
[21] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", RFC 793,
     USC/Information Sciences Institute, September 1981.
[22] ISO DP 9534: "Information processing systems - Open Systems
     Interconnection, Application Layer Structure", 10 March 1987.
[23] Rose, M., and D. Cass, "ISO Transport Services on top of the TCP,
     Version: 3", RFC 1006, Northrop Research and Technology Center,
     May 1987.
[24] ISO 8822: "Information Processing Systems - Open Systems
     Interconnection, Connection Oriented Presentation Service
     Definition", June 1987.
[25] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", RFC 791, USC/Information
     Sciences Institute, September 1981.
[26] CCITT Draft Recommendation X.500, ISO 9594/1-8: "The Directory",
     Geneva, March 1988.
[27] Warrier, U. and L. Besaw, "The Common Management Information
     Services and Protocol over TCP/IP (CMOT)", RFC 1095, Unisys
     Corporation, Hewlett-Packard, April 1989.
[28] McCloghrie, K., and M. Rose, "Management Information Base for
     Network Management of TCP/IP-based internets", RFC 1156, Hughes
     LAN Systems, Performance Systems International, May 1990.

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 13] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

[29]  LaBarre, L., "OIM MIB-II", working note, December 1989.
[30] NIST NMSIG, "NIST Stable Implementers Agreements", NIST Special
     Publication 500-162, as ammended by June 1990.
[31] NIST NMSIG, "NIST Working Implementers Agreements", December
     1989.
[32] ISO IS 9595 1989: DAD1: "CMIS Add/Remove Addendum".
[33] ISO IS 9595 1989: DAD2: "CMIS Cancel-Get Addendum".
[34] ISO IS 9596 1989: DAD1: "CMIP Add/Remove Addendum".
[35] ISO IS 9596 1989: DAD2: "CMIP Cancel-Get Addendum".

8. Security Considerations

 Security issues are not discussed in this memo.

9. Authors' Addresses

 Unnikrishnan S. Warrier
 NetLabs
 11693 San Vicente Blvd
 Suite 348
 Los Angeles, CA 90049
 Phone: (213) 476-4070
 Email: unni@netlabs.com
 Larry Besaw
 Hewlett-Packard
 3404 East Harmony Road
 Fort Collins, CO 80525
 Phone: (303) 229-6022
 Email: lmb%hpcndaw@hplabs.hp.com
 Lee LaBarre
 Mitre
 Burlington Road
 Bedford, MA 01730
 Phone: (617) 271-8507
 Email: cel@mbunix.mitre.org

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 14] RFC 1189 CMOT and CMIP October 1990

 Brian D. Handspicker
 Digital Equipment Corporation
 550 King St.
 Littleton, Ma. 01460
 Phone: (508) 486-7894
 Email: bd@vines.enet.dec.com

Warrier, Besaw, LaBarre & Handspicker [Page 15]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc1189.txt · Last modified: 1990/10/26 23:59 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki