⭐ 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

📄 rfc2215.txt

📁 著名的RFC文档,其中有一些文档是已经翻译成中文的的.
💻 TXT
📖 第 1 页 / 共 3 页
字号:
Network Working Group                                        S. ShenkerRequest for Comments: 2215                                J. WroclawskiCategory: Standards Track                            Xerox PARC/MIT LCS                                                         September 1997                General Characterization Parameters for                  Integrated Service Network ElementsStatus 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.Abstract   This memo defines a set of general control and characterization   parameters for network elements supporting the IETF integrated   services QoS control framework. General parameters are those with   common, shared definitions across all QoS control services.1. Introduction   This memo defines the set of general control and characterization   parameters used by network elements supporting the integrated   services framework.  "General" means that the parameter has a common   definition and shared meaning across all QoS control services.   Control parameters are used by applications to provide information to   the network related to QoS control requests. An example is the   traffic specification (TSpec) generated by application senders and   receivers.   Characterization parameters are used to discover or characterize the   QoS management environment along the path of a packet flow requesting   active end-to-end QoS control.  These characterizations may   eventually be used by the application requesting QoS control, or by   other network elements along the path. Examples include information   about which QoS control services are available along a network path   and estimates of the available path bandwidth.   Individual QoS control service specifications may refer to these   parameter definitions as well as defining additional parameters   specific to the needs of that service.Shenker & Wroclawski        Standards Track                     [Page 1]RFC 2215          General Characterization Parameters     September 1997   Parameters are assigned machine-oriented ID's using a method   described in [RFC 2216] and summarized here.  These ID's may be used   within protocol messages (e.g., as described in [RFC 2210]) or   management interfaces to describe the parameter values present. Each   parameter ID is composed from two numerical fields, one identifying   the service associated with the parameter (the <service_number>), and   the other (the <parameter_number>) identifying the parameter itself.   Because the definitions of the parameters defined in this note are   common to all QoS control services, the <parameter_number> values for   the parameters defined here are assigned from the "general   parameters" range (1 - 127).      NOTE: <parameter_numbers> in the range 128 - 254 name parameters      with definitions specific to a particular QoS control service. In      contrast to the general parameters described here, it is necessary      to consider both the <service_number> and <parameter_number> to      determine the meaning of the parameter.      Service number 1 is reserved for use as described in Section 2 of      this note. Service numbers 2 through 254 will be allocated to      individual QoS control services. Currently, Guaranteed service      [RFC 2212] is allocated number 2, and Controlled-load service [RFC      2211] is allocated number 5.   In this note, the textual form                    <service_number, parameter_number>   is used to write a service_number, parameter_number pair.  The range   of possible of service_number and parameter_number values specified   in [RFC 2216] allow the parameter ID to directly form the tail   portion of a MIB object ID representing the parameter. This   simplifies the task of making parameter values available to network   management applications.   The definition of each parameter used to characterize a path through   the network describes two types of values; local and composed.  A   Local value gives information about a single network element.   Composed values reflect the running composition of local values along   a path, specified by some composition rule.  Each parameter   definition specifies the composition rule for that parameter. The   composition rule tells how to combine an incoming composed value   (from the already-traversed portion of the path) and the local value,   to give a new composed value which is passed to the next network   element in the path. Note that the composition may proceed eitherShenker & Wroclawski        Standards Track                     [Page 2]RFC 2215          General Characterization Parameters     September 1997   downstream, toward the receiver(s), or upstream, toward the sender.   Each parameter may give only one definition for the local value, but   may potentially give more than one definition for composition rules   and composed values. This is because it may be useful to compose the   same local value several times following different composition rules.   Because characterization parameters are used to compute the   properties of a specific path through the internetwork, all   characterization parameter definitions are conceptually "per-next-   hop", as opposed to "per interface" or "per network element".  In   cases where the network element is (or is controlling) a shared media   or large-cloud subnet, the element may need to provide different   values for different next-hops within the cloud.  In practice, it may   be appropriate for vendors to choose and document a tolerance range,   such that if all next-hop values are within the tolerance range only   a single value need be stored and provided.   Local and composed characterization parameter values have distinct   ID's so that a network management entity can examine the value of   either a local or path-composed parameter at any point within the   network.   Each parameter definition includes a description of the minimal   properties, such as range and precision, required of any wire   representation of that parameter's values. Each definition also   includes an XDR [RFC 1832] description of the parameter, describing   an appropriate external (wire) data representation for the   parameter's values. This dual definition is intended to encourage a   common wire representation format whenever possible, while still   allowing other representations when required by the specific   circumstances (e.g., ASN.1 within SNMP).   The message formats specified in [RFC 2210] for use with the RSVP   setup protocol use the XDR data representation parameters.   All of the parameters described in this note are mandatory, in the   sense that a network element claiming to support integrated service   must recognize arriving values in setup and management protocol   messages, process them correctly, and export a reasonable value in   response. For some parameters, the specification requires that the   network element compute and export an *accurate* local value. For   other parameters, it is acceptable for the network element to   indicate that it cannot compute and export an accurate local value.   The definition of these parameters provides a reserved value which   indicates "indeterminate" or "invalid". This value signals that an   element cannot process the parameter accurately, and consequently   that the result of the end-to-end composition is also questionable.Shenker & Wroclawski        Standards Track                     [Page 3]RFC 2215          General Characterization Parameters     September 1997      NOTE (temporary): Previous versions of this and the RSVP use      document used both the reserved-value approach and a separate      INVALID flag to record this fact.  Now, the reserved-value      approach is used exclusively. This is so that any protocol which      retrieves a parameter value, including SNMP, can carry the invalid      indication without needing a separate flag. The INVALID flag      remains in the RSVP message format but is reserved for use only      with a possible future service-composition scheme.2. Default and Service-Specific Values for General Parameters   General parameters have a common *definition* across all QoS control   services. Frequently, the same *value* of a general parameter will be   correct for all QoS control services offered by a network element. In   this circumstance, there is no need to export a separate copy of the   value for each QoS control service; instead the node can export one   number which applies to all supported services.   A general parameter value which applies to all services supported at   a network node is called a default or global value. For example, if   all of the QoS control services provided at a node support the same   maximum packet size, the node may export a single default value for   the PATH_MTU parameter described in Section 3, rather than providing   a separate copy of the value for each QoS control service. In the   common case, this reduces both message size and processing overhead   for the setup protocol.   Occasionally an individual service needs to report a value differing   from the default value for a particular general parameter. For   example, if the implementation of Guaranteed Service [RFC 2212] at a   router is restricted by scheduler or hardware considerations to a   maximum packet size smaller than supported by the router's best-   effort forwarding path, the implementation may wish to export a   "service-specific" value of the PATH_MTU parameter so that   applications using the Guaranteed service will function correctly.   In the example above, the router might supply a value of 1500 for the   default PATH_MTU parameter, and a value of 250 for the PATH_MTU   parameter applying to guaranteed service. In this case, the setup   protocol providing path characterization carries (and delivers to the   application) both a value for Guaranteed service and a value for   other services.   The distinction between default and service-specific parameter values   makes no sense for non-general parameters (those defined by a   specific QoS control service, rather than this note), because both   the definition and value of the parameter are always specific to the   particular service.Shenker & Wroclawski        Standards Track                     [Page 4]RFC 2215          General Characterization Parameters     September 1997   The distinction between default and service-specific values for   general parameters is reflected in the parameter ID name space.  This   allows network nodes, setup protocols, and network management tools   to distinguish default from service-specific values, and to determine   which service a service-specific parameter value is associated with.   Service number 1 is used to indicate the default value. A parameter   value identified by the ID:                           <1, parameter_number>   is a default value, which applies to all services unless it is   overridden by a service-specific value for the same parameter.   A parameter value identified by the ID:                    <service_number, parameter_number>   where service_number is not equal to 1, is a service-specific value.   It applies only to the service identified by service_number.   These service-specific values are also called override values.  This   is because when both service-specific and default values are present   for a parameter, the service-specific value overrides the default   value (for the service to which it applies). The rules for composing   service-specific and global general parameters support this override   capability.  The basic rule is to use the service-specific value if   it exists, and otherwise the global value.   A complete summary of the characterization parameter composition   process is given below. In this summary, the "arriving value" is the   incompletely composed parameter value arriving from a neighbor node.   The "local value" is the (global or service-specific) value made   available by the local node. The "result" is the newly composed value   to be sent to the next node on the data path.     1. Examine the <service_number, parameter_number> pair associated     with the arriving value. This information is conveyed by the setup     protocol together with the arriving value.     2. If the arriving value is for a parameter specific to a single     service (this is true when the parameter_number is larger than     128), compose the arriving value with the local value exported by     the specified service, and pass the result to the next hop. In this     case there is no need to consider global values, because the     parameter itself is specific to just one service.Shenker & Wroclawski        Standards Track                     [Page 5]RFC 2215          General Characterization Parameters     September 1997     3. If the arriving value is a service-specific value for a     generally defined parameter (the parameter_number is 127 or less,     and the service_number is other than 1), and the local     implementation of that service also exports a service-specific     value for the parameter, compose the service-specific arriving     value and the service-specific local value of the parameter, and     pass the result as a service-specific value to the next-hop node.     4. If the arriving value is a service-specific value for a general     parameter (the parameter_number is 127 or less, and the     service_number is other than 1), and the local implementation of     that service does *not* export a service-specific value, compose     the service-specific arriving value with the global value for that     parameter exported by the local node, and pass the result as a

⌨️ 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 + -