⭐ 欢迎来到虫虫下载站! | 📦 资源下载 📁 资源专辑 ℹ️ 关于我们
⭐ 虫虫下载站

📄 rfc985.txt

📁 RFC 相关的技术文档
💻 TXT
📖 第 1 页 / 共 4 页
字号:
Network Working Group                   Network Technical Advisory GroupRequest for Comments: 985                                            NSF                                                                May 1986              Requirements for Internet Gateways -- DraftStatus of this Memo   This RFC summarizes the requirements for gateways to be used on   networks supporting the DARPA Internet protocols.  While it applies   specifically to National Science Foundation research programs, the   requirements are stated in a general context and are believed   applicable throughout the Internet community.  This document was   prepared by the Gateway Requirements Subcommittee of the NSF Network   Technical Advisory Group in cooperation with the Internet Activities   Board, Internet Architecture Task Force and Internet Engineering Task   Force.  It requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.   Distribution of this memo is unlimited.   The purpose of this document is to present guidance for vendors   offering products that might be used or adapted for use in an   Internet application.  It enumerates the protocols required and gives   references to RFCs and other documents describing the current   specifications.  In a number of cases the specifications are evolving   and may contain ambiguous or incomplete information.  In these cases   further discussion giving specific guidance is included in this   document.  Specific policy issues relevant to the NSF scientific   networking community are summarized in an Appendix.   *********************************************************************      This is a DRAFT edition of this statement of gateway requirements.      Comments are sought on this document for consideration and      possibly incorporated in the final edition.  Comments are      especially sought from those actually developing gateways,      particular vendors and potential vendors of gateways.  The period      for comments is 90 days ending 15-Aug-86, at which time revised      edition will be issued with a new RFC number.   *********************************************************************   Suggestions and comments on this document can be sent to the   subcommittee chairman Dave Mills (mills@usc-isid.arpa), or NTAG   committee chairman Dave Farber (farber@huey.udel.edu).  The   subcommittee members, present affiliations and Internet mailboxes are   as follows:      Hank Dardy, NRL                 dardy@nrl.arpa      Dave Farber, U Delaware         farber@huey.udel.edu      Dennis Jennings, JVNC         jennings%pucc.bitnet@wiscvm.wisc.eduNTAG                                                            [Page 1]RFC 985                                                         May 1986Requirements for Internet Gateways -- DRAFT      Larry Landweber, U Wisconsin    landweber@rsch.wisc.edu      Tony Lauck, DEC                 rhea!bergil!lauck@decwrl.arpa      Dave Mills (Chairman), Linkabit mills@usc-isid.arpa      Dennis Perry, DARPA/IPTO        perry@ipto.arpa   The subcommittee wishes to thank the following additional   contributors and invited referees:      Len Bosack, Stanford U/CISCO    bosack@su-score.arpa      Bob Braden, ISI                 braden@isi-braden.arpa      Hans-Werner Braun, U Michigan   hwb@gw.umich.edu      Noel Chiappa, MIT/Proteon       jnc@proteon.arpa      Doug Comer, Purdue U            dec@cs.purdue.edu      Ira Fuchs, Princeton U          fuchs%pucc.bitnet@wiscvm.wisc.edu      Ed Krol, U Illinois            krol%uiucvmd.bitnet@wiscvm.wisc.edu      Barry Leiner, RIACS             leiner@riacs.arpa      Mike Muuss, BRL                 mike@brl.arpa      Ron Natalie, BRL                ron@brl.arpa      Harvey Newman, CIT              newman@cit-hex.arpa      Jon Postel, ISI                 postel@usc-isib.arpa      Marshall Rose, NRTC             mrose@nrtc-gremlin.northrop.com      Jeff Schiller, MIT              jis@bitsy.mit.edu      Lixia Zhang, MIT                lixia@xx.lcs.mit.edu1.  Introduction   The following sections are intended as an introduction and background   for those unfamiliar with the DARPA Internet architecture and the   Internet gateway model.  General background and discussion on the   Internet architecture and supporting protocol suite can be found in   the DDN Protocol Handbook [25] and ARPANET Information Brochure [26],   both available from the Network Information Center, SRI   International, Menlo Park, CA 94025.  Readers familiar with these   concepts can proceed directly to Section 2.   1.1.  The DARPA Internet Architecture      The DARPA Internet system consists of a number of gateways and      networks that collectively provide packet transport for hosts      subscribing to the DARPA Internet protocol architecture.  These      protocols include the Internet Protocol (IP), Internet Control      Message Protocol (ICMP), Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) and      application protocols depending upon them.  All protocols use IP      as the basic packet-transport mechanism.  IP is a datagram, or      connectionless, service and includes provision for service      specification, fragmentation/reassembly and security information.      ICMP is considered an integral part of IP, although it isNTAG                                                            [Page 2]RFC 985                                                         May 1986Requirements for Internet Gateways -- DRAFT      architecturally layered upon it.  ICMP provides error reporting,      flow control and first-hop gateway redirection.  Reliable data      delivery is provided in the protocol suite by TCP, which provides      end-end retransmission, resequencing and connection control.      Connectionless service is provided by the User Datagram Protocol      (UDP).      The Internet community presently includes several thousand hosts      connected to over 400 networks with about 120 gateways.  There are      now well over 2400 hosts registered in the ARPA domain alone and      an unknown number registered in other domains, with the total      increasing at about ten percent each month.  Many of the hosts,      gateways and networks in the Internet community are administered      by civil organizations, including universities, research      laboratories and equipment manufacturers.  Most of the remainder      are administered by the US DoD and considered part of the DDN      Internet, which presently consists of three sets of networks: the      experimental segment, or ARPANET, the unclassified segment, or      MILNET, and the classified segment, which does not yet have a      collective name.      The Internet model includes constituent networks, called local      networks to distinguish them from the Internet system as a whole,      which are required only to provide datagram (connectionless)      transport.  This requires only best-effort delivery of individual      packets, or datagrams.  Each datagram carries 32-bit source and      destination addresses, which are encoded in three formats      providing a two-part address, one of which is the local-network      number and the other the host number on that local net.  According      to the Internet service specification, datagrams can be delivered      out of order, be lost or duplicated and/or contain errors.  In      those networks providing connection-oriented service the extra      reliability provided by virtual circuits enhances the end-end      robustness of the system, but is not strictly necessary.      Local networks are connected together in the Internet model by      means of Internet gateways.  These gateways provide datagram      transport only and normally seek to minimize the state information      necessary to sustain this service in the interest of routing      flexibility and robustness.  In the conventional model the gateway      has a physical interface and address on each of the local nets      between which it provides forwarding services.  The gateway also      participates in one or more distributed routing or reachability      algorithm such as the Gateway-Gateway Protocol (GGP) or Exterior      Gateway Protocol (EGP) in order to maintain its routing tables.NTAG                                                            [Page 3]RFC 985                                                         May 1986Requirements for Internet Gateways -- DRAFT   1.2.  The Internet Gateway Model      An Internet gateway is a self-contained, stand-alone packet switch      that performs the following functions:         1.  Interfaces to two or more packet-switching networks,             including encapsulation, address transformation and flow             control.         2.  Conforms to specific DARPA Internet protocols specified in             this document, including the Internet Protocol (IP),             Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP), Exterior Gateway             Protocol (EGP) and others as necessary.         3.  Supports an interior gateway protocol (IGP) reachability or             routing algorithm in cases of multiple gateways operating             as a system.  Supports the EGP reachability algorithm to             exchange routes between systems, in particular the DARPA             "core" system operated by BBN.         4.  Receives and forwards Internet datagrams consistent with             good engineering practice in the management of resources,             congestion control and fairness.  Recognizes various error             conditions and generates ICMP error and information             messages as required.         5.  Provides system support facilities, including loading,             debugging, status reporting, exception reporting and             control.      In some configurations gateways may be connected to      packet-switching local nets that provide generic local-net      routing, error-control and resource-management functions.  In      others gateways may be directly connected via serial lines, so      that these functions must be provided by the gateways themselves.      There are three typical scenarios that should be addressed by      gateway vendors:         1.  National or regional network.  Gateways of this class             should be capable of switching multiple continuous flows in             the 1.5-Mbps range at rates to several thousand packets per             second.  They will be high-performance, possibly redundant,             multiple-processor devices, probably procured as a system             and operated remotely from a regional or national             monitoring center.  The design of these gateways should             emphasize high aggregate throughput, throughput-sensitiveNTAG                                                            [Page 4]RFC 985                                                         May 1986Requirements for Internet Gateways -- DRAFT             resource management and very high reliability.  The typical             application would be an NSF backbone net or one of the             consortium or regional nets.         2.  Campus network.  Gateways of this class should be capable             of switching some burst flows at 10-Mbps (Ethernets, etc.),             together with some flows in the 64-Kbps range or lower, at             rates to perhaps several thousand packets per second.  They             will be medium-performance devices, probably competitively             procured from different vendors for each campus and             operated from a campus computing center.  The design of             these gateways should emphasize low average delay and good             burst performance, together with delay and type-of-service             sensitive resource management.  Their chief function might             be to interconnect various LANs and campus computing             resources, including a high-speed interconnect to a             national or regional net.  An important factor will be a             very flexible routing mechanism, since these gateways may             have to select among several backbone nets based on             cost/performance considerations.         3.  Department network.  Gateways of this class should be             capable of switching a small number of burst flows at             10-Mbps (Ethernets, etc.), together with a small number of             flows in the range 64-Kbps or lower, at rates of a few             hundred packets per second.  They will be             medium-performance devices procured from a variety of             vendors and used for protocol-matching, LAN repeaters and             as general utility packet switches.  They will probably be             locally maintained by the various users and not be used as             transit switches.      It is important to realize that Internet gateways normally operate      in an unattended mode, but that equipment and software faults can      affect the entire Internet.  While some of the above scenarios      involve positive control of some gateways from a monitoring      center, usually via a path involving other networks and Internet      gateways, others may involve much less formal control procedures.      Thus the gateways must be highly robust and be expected to      operate, possibly in a degraded state, under conditions of extreme      congestion or failure of network resources.NTAG                                                            [Page 5]RFC 985                                                         May 1986Requirements for Internet Gateways -- DRAFT2.  Protocols Required   The Internet architecture uses datagram gateways to interconnect   networks and subnetworks.  These gateways function as intermediate   systems (IS) with respect to the ISO connectionless network model and   incorporate defined packet formats, routing algorithms and related   procedures.  In the following it is assumed the protocol   implementation supports the full protocol, including all required   options, with exceptions only as noted.   2.1.  Internet Protocol (IP)      This is the basic datagram protocol used in the Internet system.      It is described in RFC-791 [1] and also MIL-STD-1777 [5], both of      which are intended to describe the same standard, but in quite      different words.      With respect to current gateway requirements the following can be      ignored, although they may be required in future:  Type of Service      field, Security option, Stream ID option and Timestamp option.      However, if recognized, the interpretation of these quantities      must conform to the standard specification.      Note that the Internet gateway model does not require that the      gateway reassemble IP datagrams with destination address other      than the gateway itself.  However, in the case of those protocols      in which the gateway directly participates as a peer, including      routing and monitor/control protocols, the gateway may have to      reassemble datagrams addressed to it.  This consideration is most      pertinent to EGP.      Note that, of the five classes of IP addresses.  Class-A through      Class-E, Class-D and Class-E addresses are reserved for      experimental use.  A gateway which is not participating in these      experiments should ignore all packets with a Class-D or Class-E      destination IP address.  No ICMP Destination Unreachable or ICMP      Redirect messages should result from receiving such packets.

⌨️ 快捷键说明

复制代码 Ctrl + C
搜索代码 Ctrl + F
全屏模式 F11
切换主题 Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键 ?
增大字号 Ctrl + =
减小字号 Ctrl + -