rfc2608.txt
来自「RFC 的详细文档！」· 文本 代码 · 共 1,407 行 · 第 1/5 页
TXT
1,407 行
Network Working Group E. Guttman
Request for Comments: 2608 C. Perkins
Updates: 2165 Sun Microsystems
Category: Standards Track J. Veizades
@Home Network
M. Day
Vinca Corporation
June 1999
Service Location Protocol, Version 2
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 (1999). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
The Service Location Protocol provides a scalable framework for the
discovery and selection of network services. Using this protocol,
computers using the Internet need little or no static configuration
of network services for network based applications. This is
especially important as computers become more portable, and users
less tolerant or able to fulfill the demands of network system
administration.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction 3
1.1. Applicability Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology 4
2.1. Notation Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Protocol Overview 5
4. URLs used with Service Location 8
4.1. Service: URLs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2. Naming Authorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.3. URL Entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Service Attributes 10
6. Required Features 12
6.1. Use of Ports, UDP, and Multicast . . . . . . . . . . 13
Guttman, et al. Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 2608 Service Location Protocol, Version 2 June 1999
6.2. Use of TCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.3. Retransmission of SLP messages . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.4. Strings in SLP messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6.4.1. Scope Lists in SLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. Errors 17
8. Required SLP Messages 17
8.1. Service Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
8.2. Service Reply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
8.3. Service Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
8.4. Service Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
8.5. Directory Agent Advertisement. . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
8.6. Service Agent Advertisement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
9. Optional Features 26
9.1. Service Location Protocol Extensions . . . . . . . . . 27
9.2. Authentication Blocks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
9.2.1. SLP Message Authentication Rules . . . . . . . 29
9.2.2. DSA with SHA-1 in Authentication Blocks . . . 30
9.3. Incremental Service Registration . . . . . . . . . . 30
9.4. Tag Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
10. Optional SLP Messages 32
10.1. Service Type Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
10.2. Service Type Reply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
10.3. Attribute Request . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
10.4. Attribute Reply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
10.5. Attribute Request/Reply Examples . . . . . . . . . . . 34
10.6. Service Deregistration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
11. Scopes 37
11.1. Scope Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
11.2. Administrative and User Selectable Scopes. . . . . . . 38
12. Directory Agents 38
12.1. Directory Agent Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
12.2. Directory Agent Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
12.2.1. Active DA Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
12.2.2. Passive DA Advertising . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
12.3. Reliable Unicast to DAs and SAs. . . . . . . . . . . . 41
12.4. DA Scope Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
12.5. DAs and Authentication Blocks. . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
13. Protocol Timing Defaults 42
14. Optional Configuration 43
15. IANA Considerations 44
16. Internationalization Considerations 45
17. Security Considerations 46
A. Appendix: Changes to the Service Location Protocol from
v1 to v2 48
B. Appendix: Service Discovery by Type: Minimal SLPv2 Features 48
C. Appendix: DAAdverts with arbitrary URLs 49
D. Appendix: SLP Protocol Extensions 50
D.1. Required Attribute Missing Option . . . . . . . . . . 50
Guttman, et al. Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 2608 Service Location Protocol, Version 2 June 1999
E. Acknowledgments 50
F. References 51
G. Authors' Addresses 53
H. Full Copyright Statement 54
1. Introduction
The Service Location Protocol (SLP) provides a flexible and scalable
framework for providing hosts with access to information about the
existence, location, and configuration of networked services.
Traditionally, users have had to find services by knowing the name of
a network host (a human readable text string) which is an alias for a
network address. SLP eliminates the need for a user to know the name
of a network host supporting a service. Rather, the user supplies
the desired type of service and a set of attributes which describe
the service. Based on that description, the Service Location
Protocol resolves the network address of the service for the user.
SLP provides a dynamic configuration mechanism for applications in
local area networks. Applications are modeled as clients that need
to find servers attached to any of the available networks within an
enterprise. For cases where there are many different clients and/or
services available, the protocol is adapted to make use of nearby
Directory Agents that offer a centralized repository for advertised
services.
This document updates SLPv1 [RFC 2165], correcting protocol errors,
adding some enhancements and removing some requirements. This
specification has two parts. The first describes the required
features of the protocol. The second describes the extended features
of the protocol which are optional, and allow greater scalability.
1.1. Applicability Statement
SLP is intended to function within networks under cooperative
administrative control. Such networks permit a policy to be
implemented regarding security, multicast routing and organization of
services and clients into groups which are not be feasible on the
scale of the Internet as a whole.
SLP has been designed to serve enterprise networks with shared
services, and it may not necessarily scale for wide-area service
discovery throughout the global Internet, or in networks where there
are hundreds of thousands of clients or tens of thousands of
services.
Guttman, et al. Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 2608 Service Location Protocol, Version 2 June 1999
2. Terminology
User Agent (UA)
A process working on the user's behalf to establish
contact with some service. The UA retrieves service
information from the Service Agents or Directory Agents.
Service Agent (SA) A process working on the behalf of one or more
services to advertise the services.
Directory Agent (DA) A process which collects service
advertisements. There can only be one DA present per
given host.
Service Type Each type of service has a unique Service Type
string.
Naming Authority The agency or group which catalogues given
Service Types and Attributes. The default Naming
Authority is IANA.
Scope A set of services, typically making up a logical
administrative group.
URL A Universal Resource Locator [8].
2.1. Notation Conventions
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [9].
Syntax Syntax for string based protocols follow the
conventions defined for ABNF [11].
Strings All strings are encoded using the UTF-8 [23]
transformation of the Unicode [6] character set and
are NOT null terminated when transmitted. Strings
are preceded by a two byte length field.
<string-list> A comma delimited list of strings with the
following syntax:
string-list = string / string `,' string-list
In format diagrams, any field ending with a \ indicates a variable
length field, given by a prior length field in the protocol.
Guttman, et al. Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 2608 Service Location Protocol, Version 2 June 1999
3. Protocol Overview
The Service Location Protocol supports a framework by which client
applications are modeled as 'User Agents' and services are advertised
by 'Service Agents.' A third entity, called a 'Directory Agent'
provides scalability to the protocol.
The User Agent issues a 'Service Request' (SrvRqst) on behalf of the
client application, specifying the characteristics of the service
which the client requires. The User Agent will receive a Service
Reply (SrvRply) specifying the location of all services in the
network which satisfy the request.
The Service Location Protocol framework allows the User Agent to
directly issue requests to Service Agents. In this case the request
is multicast. Service Agents receiving a request for a service which
they advertise unicast a reply containing the service's location.
+------------+ ----Multicast SrvRqst----> +---------------+
| User Agent | | Service Agent |
+------------+ <----Unicast SrvRply------ +---------------+
In larger networks, one or more Directory Agents are used. The
Directory Agent functions as a cache. Service Agents send register
messages (SrvReg) containing all the services they advertise to
Directory Agents and receive acknowledgements in reply (SrvAck).
These advertisements must be refreshed with the Directory Agent or
they expire. User Agents unicast requests to Directory Agents
instead of Service Agents if any Directory Agents are known.
+-------+ -Unicast SrvRqst-> +-----------+ <-Unicast SrvReg- +--------+
| User | | Directory | |Service |
| Agent | | Agent | | Agent |
+-------+ <-Unicast SrvRply- +-----------+ -Unicast SrvAck-> +--------+
User and Service Agents discover Directory Agents two ways. First,
they issue a multicast Service Request for the 'Directory Agent'
service when they start up. Second, the Directory Agent sends an
unsolicited advertisement infrequently, which the User and Service
Agents listen for. In either case the Agents receive a DA
Advertisement (DAAdvert).
+---------------+ --Multicast SrvRqst-> +-----------+
| User or | <--Unicast DAAdvert-- | Directory |
| Service Agent | | Agent |
+---------------+ <-Multicast DAAdvert- +-----------+
Guttman, et al. Standards Track [Page 5]
⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码Ctrl + C
搜索代码Ctrl + F
全屏模式F11
增大字号Ctrl + =
减小字号Ctrl + -
显示快捷键?