⭐ 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

📄 rfc2166.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 2 页
字号:
   - TCP connections on demand     Two DLSw peers using these enhancements will only establish a TCP     connection when necessary.  SSP connections to DLSw peers which do     not implement these enhancements are assumed to be established by     the means defined in RFC 1795.  DLSws implementing v2.0 utilize UDP     based transport services to send address resolution packets     (CANUREACH_ex, NETBIOS_NQ_ex, etc.).  If a positive response is     received, then a TCP connection is only established to the     associated DLSw peer if one does not already exist.     Correspondingly, TCP connections are brought down when there are no     circuits to a DLSw peer for an implementation defined period of     time.Bryant & Brittain            Informational                      [Page 6]RFC 2166              APPN Implementer's Workshop             June 1997   - Address resolution through UDP     The main thrust of this paper is to utilize non-reliable transport     and the inherent efficiencies of multicast protocols whenever     possible and applicable to reduce network overhead.  Accordingly,     the address resolution protocols of SNA and NetBIOS are sent over     the non-reliable transport of IP, namely UDP.  In addition, IP     multicast/unicast services are used whenever address resolution     packets must be sent to multiple destinations. This avoids the need     to maintain TCP SSP connections between two DLSw peers when no     circuits are active.  CANUREACH_ex and ICANREACH_ex packets can be     sent to all the appropriate DLSw peers without the need for pre-     configured peers or pre-established TCP/IP connections.  In     addition, most multicast services (including TCP's MOSPF, DVMRP,     MIP, etc.) replicate and propagate messages only as necessary to     deliver to all multicast members.   This avoids duplication and     excessive bandwidth consumption in the transport network.     To further optimize the use of WAN resources, address resolution     responses are sent in a directed fashion (i.e., unicast) via UDP     transport whenever possible.   This avoids the need to setup or     maintain TCP connections when they are not required.  It also     avoids the bandwidth costs associated with broadcasting.     Note: It is also permitted to send some address resolution traffic     over existing TCP connections.  The conditions under which this is     permitted are detailed in section 7.   - NetBIOS broadcasts over UDP     In the same manner as above, NetBIOS broadcast packets are sent via     UDP (unicast and multicast) whenever possible and appropriate. This     avoids the need to establish TCP connections between DLSw peers     when there are no circuits required.   In addition, bandwidth in     the transport network is conserved by utilizing the efficiencies     inherent to multicast service implementation.  Details covering     identification of these packets and proper propagation methods are     described in section 10.5. Multicast Groups and Addressing   IP multicast services provides an unreliable datagram oriented   delivery service to multiple parties. Communication is accomplished   by sending and/or listening to specific 'multicast' addresses.  When   a given node sends a packet to a specific address (defined to be   within the multicast address range), the IP network (unreliably)   delivers the packet to every node listening on that address.Bryant & Brittain            Informational                      [Page 7]RFC 2166              APPN Implementer's Workshop             June 1997   Thus, DLSws can make use of this service by simply sending and   receiving (i.e., listening for) packets on the appropriate multicast   addresses. With careful planning and implementation, networks can be   effectively partitioned and network overhead controlled by sending   and listening on different addresses groups.  It is not the intent of   this paper to define or describe the techniques by which this can be   accomplished.  It is expected that the networking industry (vendors   and end users alike) will determine the most appropriate ways to make   use of the functions provided by use of DLSw multicast transport   services.5.1 Using Multicast Groups   The multicast addressing as described above can be effectively used   to limit the amount of broadcast/multicast traffic in the network.   It is not the intent of this document to describe how individual   DLSw/SSP implementations would assign or choose group addresses.  The   specifics of how this is done and exposed to the end user is an issue   for the specific implementor.  In order to provide for multivendor   interoperability and simplicity of configuration, however, this paper   defines a single IP multicast address, 224.0.10.000, to be used as a   default DLSw multicast address.  If a given implementation chooses to   provide a default multicast address, it is recommended this address   be used.  In addition, this address should be used for both   transmitting and receiving of multicast SSP messages.  Implementation   of a default multicast address is not, however, required.5.2 DLSw Multicast Addresses   For the purpose of long term interoperability, the AIW has secured a   block of IP multicast addresses to be used with DLSw.  These   addresses are listed below:   Address Range        Purpose   --------------------------------------------------------------------   224.0.10.000         Default multicast address   224.0.10.001-191     User defined DLSw multicast groups   224.0.10.192-255     Reserved for future use by the DLSw RIG in DLSw                        enhancements6. DLSw Message Transports   With the introduction of DLSw Multicast Protocols, SSP messages are   now sent over two distinct transport mechanisms: TCP/IP connections   and UDP services.  Furthermore, the UDP datagrams can be sent to two   different kinds of IP addresses: unique IP addresses (generally   associated with a specific DLSw), and multicast IP addresses   (generally associated with a group of DLSw peers).Bryant & Brittain            Informational                      [Page 8]RFC 2166              APPN Implementer's Workshop             June 19976.1 TCP/IP Connections on Demand   As is the case in RFC 1795, TCP/IP connections are established   between DLSw peers.  Unlike RFC 1795, however, TCP/IP connections are   only established to carry reliable circuit data (i.e., LLC2 based   circuits).  Accordingly, a TCP/IP connection is only established to a   given DLSw peer when the first circuit to that DLSw is required   (i.e., the origin DLSw must send a CANUREACH_CS to a target DLSw peer   and there is no existing TCP connection between the two).  In   addition, the TCP/IP connection is brought down an implementation   defined amount of time after the last active (not pending) circuit   has terminated.  In this way, the overhead associated with   maintaining TCP connections is minimized.   With the advent of TCP connections on demand, the activation and   deactivation of TCP connections becomes a normal occurrence as   opposed to the exception event it constitutes in RFC 1795.  For this   reason, it is recommended that implementations carefully consider the   value of SNMP traps for this condition.6.1.1 TCP Connections on Demand Race Conditions   Non-circuit based SSP packetsn (e.g.,CANUREACH_ex, etc.) may still be   sent/received over TCP connections after all circuits have been   terminated.  Taking this into account implementations should still   gracefully terminate these TCP connections once the connection is no   longer supporting circuits.  This may require an implementation to   retransmit request frames over UDP when no response to a TCP based   unicast request is received and the TCP connection is brought down.   This is not required in the case of multicast requests as these are   received over the multicast transport mechanism.6.2 Single Session TCP/IP Connections   RFC 1795 defines the use of two unidirectional TCP/IP sessions   between any pair of DLSw peers using read port number 2065 and write   port number 2067.  Additionally, RFC 1795 allows for implementations   to optionally use only one bi-directional TCP/IP session.  Using one   TCP/IP session between DLSw peers is believed to significantly   improve the performance and scalability of DLSw protocols.   Performance is improved because TCP/IP acknowledgments are much more   likely to be piggy-backed on real data when TCP/IP sessions are used   bi-directionally.  Scalability is improved because fewer TCP control   blocks, state machines, and associated message buffers are required.   For these reasons, the DLSw enhancements defined in this paper   REQUIRE the use of single session TCP/IP sessions.Bryant & Brittain            Informational                      [Page 9]RFC 2166              APPN Implementer's Workshop             June 1997   Accordingly, DLSws implementing these enhancements must carry the TCP   Connections Control Vector in their Capabilities Exchange.  In   addition, the TCP Connections Control Vector must indicate support   for 1 connection.6.2.1 Expedited Single Session TCP/IP Connections   In RFC 1795, single session TCP/IP connections are accomplished by   first establishing two uni-directional TCP connections, exchanging   capabilities, and then bringing down one of the connections.  In   order to avoid the unnecessary flows and time delays associated with   this process, a new single session bi-directional TCP/IP connection   establishment algorithm is defined.6.2.1.1 TCP Port Numbers   DLSws implementing these enhancements will use a TCP destination port   of 2067 (as opposed to RFC 1795 which uses 2065) for single session   TCP connections.  The source port will be a random port number using   the established TCP norms which exclude the possibility of either   2065 or 2067.6.2.1.2 TCP Connection Setup   DLSw peers implementing these enhancements will establish a single   session TCP connection whenever the associated peer is known to   support this capability.  To do this, the initiating DLSw simply   sends a TCP setup request to destination port 2067.  The receiving   DLSw responds accordingly and the TCP three way handshake ensues.   Once this handshake has completed, each DLSw is notified and the DLSw   capabilities exchange ensues.  As in RFC 1795, no flows may take   place until the capabilities exchange completes.6.2.1.3 Single Session Setup Race Conditions   The new expedited single session setup procedure described above   opens up the possibility of a race condition that occurs when two   DLSw peers attempt to setup single session TCP connections to each   other at the same time.  To avoid the establishment of two TCP   connections, the following rules are applied when establishing   expedited single session TCP connections:   1.If an inbound TCP connect indication is received on port 2067 while     an outbound TCP connect request (on port 2067) to the same DLSw (IP     address) is in process or outstanding, the DLSw with the higher IP     address will close or reject the connection from the DLSw with the     lower IP address.Bryant & Brittain            Informational                     [Page 10]RFC 2166              APPN Implementer's Workshop             June 1997   2.To further expedite the process, the DLSw with the lower IP address     may choose (implementation option) to close its connection request     to the DLSw with the higher address when this condition is     detected.   3.If the DLSw with the lower IP address has already sent its     capabilities exchange request on its connection to the DLSw with     the higher IP address, it must resend its capabilities exchange     request over the remaining TCP connection from its DLSw peer (with     the higher IP address).   4.The DLSw with the higher IP address must ignore any capabilities     exchange request received over the TCP connection to be terminated     (the one from the DLSw with the lower IP address).6.2.1.4 TCP Connections with Non-Multicast Capable DLSw peers   During periods of migration, it is possible that TCP connections   between multicast capable and non-multicast capable DLSw peers will   occur.  It is also possible that multicast capable DLSws may attempt   to establish TCP connections with partners of unknown capabilities   (e.g., statically defined peers).  To handle these conditions the   following additional rules apply to expedited single session TCP   connection setup:   1.If the capability of a DLSw peer is not known, an implementation     may choose to send the initial TCP connect request to either port     2067 (expedited single session setup) or port 2065 (standard RFC     1795 TCP setup).   2.If a multicast capable DLSw receives an inbound TCP connect request     on port 2065 while processing an outbound request on 2067 to the     same DLSw, the sending DLSw will terminate its 2067 request and     respond as defined in RFC 1795 with an outbound 2065 request     (standard RFC 1795 TCP setup).   3.If a multicast capable DLSw receives an indication that the DLSw     peer is not multicast capable (the port 2067 setup request times     out or a port not recognized rejection is received), it will send     another connection request using port 2065 and the standard RFC     1795 session setup protocol.Bryant & Brittain            Informational                     [Page 11]RFC 2166              APPN Implementer's Workshop             June 19976.3 UDP Datagrams   As mentioned above, UDP datagrams can be sent two different ways:   unicast (e.g., sent to a single unique IP address) or multicast   (i.e., sent to an IP multicast address).  Throughout this document,   the term UDP datagram will be used to refer to SSP messages sent over   UDP, while unicast and multicast SSP messages will refer to the   specific type/method of UDP packet transport.  In either case,   standard UDP services are used to transport these packets.  In order   to properly parse the inbound UDP packets and deliver them to the SSP   state machines, all DLSw UDP packets will use the destination port of   2067.   In addition, the checksum function of UDP remains optional for DLSw   SSP messages.  It is believed that the inherent CRC capabilities of   all data link transports will adequately protect SSP packets during   transmission.  And the incremental exposure to intermediate nodal   data corruption is negligible.  For further information on UDP packet   formats see the 揊rame Formats

⌨️ 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 + -