|
1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
IETF RFC 3411 (2002)
|
|
Title:
|
An Architecture for Describing Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) Management Frameworks
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
|
All are approved IETF documents
|
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
|
Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) is used in this H.SNMF. This is the standard reference for SNMP. There are no ITU-T Recommendations or ISO International Standards that cover HTML.
|
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/. Specifically: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=rfc_search&rfc_search=3411
|
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
|
Approved December 2002, widely used in the industry.
|
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
|
Standards Track RFC.
|
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
|
Obsoletes: 2571; updated by RFCs 5343, 5590.
|
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
|
Normative References/
/
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate/
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997./
/
[RFC2279] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO/
10646", RFC 2279, January 1998./
/
[RFC2578] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J.,/
Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Structure of Management/
Information Version 2 (SMIv2)", STD 58, RFC 2578, April/
1999./
/
[RFC2579] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J.,/
Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Textual Conventions for/
SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2579, April 1999./
/
[RFC2580] McCloghrie, K., Perkins, D., Schoenwaelder, J., Case, J.,/
Rose, M. and S. Waldbusser, "Conformance Statements for/
SMIv2", STD 58, RFC 2580, April 1999./
/
[RFC3412] Case, J., Harrington, D., Presuhn, R. and B. Wijnen,/
"Message Processing and Dispatching for the Simple/
Network Management Protocol (SNMP)", STD 62, RFC 3412,/
December 2002./
/
[RFC3413] Levi, D., Meyer, P. and B. Stewart, "Simple Network/
Management Protocol (SNMP) Applications", STD 62, RFC/
3413, December 2002./
/
[RFC3414] Blumenthal, U. and B. Wijnen, "User-Based Security Model/
(USM) for Version 3 of the Simple Network Management/
Protocol (SNMPv3)", STD 62, RFC 3414, December 2002./
/
[RFC3415] Wijnen, B., Presuhn, R. and K. McCloghrie, "View-based/
Access Control Model (VACM) for the Simple Network/
Management Protocol (SNMP)", STD 62, RFC 3415, December/
2002./
/
[RFC3416] Presuhn, R., Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M. and S./
Waldbusser, "Protocol Operations for the Simple Network/
Management Protocol (SNMP)", STD 62, RFC 3416, December/
2002./
/
[RFC3417] Presuhn, R., Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M. and S./
Waldbusser, "Transport Mappings for the Simple Network/
Management Protocol (SNMP)", STD 62, RFC 3417, December/
2002./
/
[RFC3418] Presuhn, R., Case, J., McCloghrie, K., Rose, M. and S./
Waldbusser, "Management Information Base (MIB) for the/
Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)", STD 62, RFC/
3418, December 2002./
/
|
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
|
If the study group decides to make the reference to the RFC, the reference should always be made by RFC number (and not by other designations such as STD, BCP, etc.). References should not be made to documents referred to as "Internet Drafts" or RFCs categorized as "Historic". Normative references should not be made to RFCs that are not standards, for example, "Informational" and "Experimental" RFCs
|
|
