⭐ 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

📄 rfc2746.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 4 页
字号:
4.2.1.  Handling End-to-End PATH Messages at Rentry   When forwarding an end-to-end PATH message, a router acting as the   tunnel entry point, Rentry, takes the following actions depending on   the end-to-end session mentioned in the PATH message. There are two   possible cases:      1. The end-to-end PATH message is a refresh of a previously known         end-to-end session.      2. The end-to-end PATH message is from a new end-to-end session.   If the PATH message is a refresh of a previously known end-to-end   session, then Rentry refreshes the Path state of the end-to-end   session and checks to see if this session is mapped to a tunnel   session. If this is the case, then when Rentry refreshes the end-to-   end session, it includes in the end-to-end PATH message a   SESSION_ASSOC object linking this session to its corresponding tunnel   session It then encapsulates the end-to-end PATH message and sends it   over the tunnel to Rexit. If the tunnel session was dynamically   created, the end-to-end PATH message serves as a refresh for the   local tunnel state at Rentry as well as for the end-to-end session.Terzis, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 13]RFC 2746             RSVP Operation Over IP Tunnels         January 2000   Otherwise, if the PATH message is from a new end-to-end session that   has not yet been mapped to a tunnel session, Rentry creates Path   state for this new session setting the outgoing interface to be the   tunnel interface. After that, Rentry encapsulates the PATH message   and sends it to Rexit without adding a SESSION_ASSOC message.   When an end-to-end PATH TEAR is received by Rentry, this node   encapsulates and forwards the message to Rexit. If this end-to-end   session has a one-to-one mapping to a tunnel session or if this is   the last one of the many end-to-end sessions mapping to a tunnel   session, Rentry tears down the tunnel session by sending a PATH TEAR   for that session to Rexit. If, on the other hand, there are remaining   end-to-end sessions mapping to the tunnel session, then Rentry sends   a tunnel PATH message adjusting the Tspec of the tunnel session.4.2.2.  Handling End-to-End PATH Messages at Rexit   Encapsulated end-to-end PATH messages are decapsulated and processed   at Rexit. Depending on whether the end-to-end PATH message contains a   SESSION_ASSOC object or not, Rexit takes the following steps:      1. If the end-to-end PATH message does not contain a SESSION_ASSOC         object, then Rentry sets the Non_RSVP flag at the Path state         stored for this end-to-end sender, sets the global break bit in         the ADSPEC and forwards the packets downstream. Alternatively,         if tunnel sessions exist and none of them has the Non_RSVP flag         set, Rexit can pick the worst-case Path ADSPEC params from the         existing tunnel sessions and update the end-to-end ADSPEC using         these values. This is a conservative estimation of the composed         ADSPEC but it has the benefit of avoiding to set the break bit         in the end-to-end ADSPEC before mapping information is         available. In this case the Non_RSVP flag at the end-to-end         Path state is not set.      2. If the PATH message contains a SESSION_ASSOC object and no         association for this end-to-end session already exists, then         Rexit records the association between the end-to-end session         and the tunnel session described by the object. If the end-to-         end PATH arrives early before the tunnel PATH message arrives         then it creates PATH state at Rexit for the tunnel session.         When the actual PATH message for the tunnel session arrives it         is treated as an update of the existing PATH state and it         updates any information missing. We believe that this situation         is another transient along with the others existing in RSVP and         that it does not have any long-term effects on the correct         operation of the mechanism described here.Terzis, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 14]RFC 2746             RSVP Operation Over IP Tunnels         January 2000         Before further forwarding the message to the next hop along the         path to the destination, Rexit finds the corresponding tunnel         session's recorded state and turns on Non_RSVP flag in the         end-to-end Path state if the Non_RSVP bit was turned on for the         tunnel session.  If the end-to-end PATH message carries an         ADSPEC object, Rexit performs composition of the         characterization parameters contained in the ADSPEC. It does         this by considering the tunnel session's overall (composed)         characterization parameters as the local parameters for the         logical link implemented by the tunnel, and composing these         parameters with those in the end-to-end ADSPEC by executing         each parameter's defined composition function. In the logical         link's characterization parameters, the minimum path latency         may take into account the encapsulation/decapsulation delay and         the bandwidth estimate can represent the decrease in available         bandwidth caused by the addition of the extra UDP header.         ADSPECs and composition functions are discussed in great detail         in [RFC2210].         If the end-to-end session has reservation state, while no         reservation state for the matching tunnel session exists, Rexit         send a tunnel RESV message to Rentry matching the reservation         in the end-to-end session.   If Rentry does not support RSVP tunneling, then Rexit will have no   PATH state for the tunnel. In this case Rexit simply turns on the   global break bit in the decapsulated end-to-end PATH message and   forwards it.4.2.3.  Handling End-to-End RESV Messages at Rexit   When forwarding a RESV message upstream, a router serving as the exit   router, Rexit, may discover that one of the upstream interfaces is a   tunnel.  In this case the router performs a number of tests.   Step 1: Rexit must determine if there is a tunnel session bound to   the end-to-end session given in the RESV message.  If not, the tunnel   is treated as a non-RSVP link, Rexit appends a NODE_CHAR object with   the T bit set, to the RESV message and forwards it over the tunnel   interface (where it is encapsulated as a normal IP datagram and   forwarded towards Rentry).   Step 2: If a bound tunnel session is found, Rexit checks to see if a   reservation is already in place for the tunnel session bound to the   end-to-end session given in the RESV message. If the arriving end-   to-end RESV message is a refresh of existing RESV state, then Rexit   sends the original RESV through tunnel interface (after adding the   NODE_CHAR object). For dynamic tunnel sessions, the end-to-end RESVTerzis, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 15]RFC 2746             RSVP Operation Over IP Tunnels         January 2000   message acts as a refresh for the tunnel session reservation state,   while for configured tunnel sessions, reservation state never   expires.   If the arriving end-to-end RESV message causes a change in the end-   to-end RESV flowspec parameters, it may also trigger an attempt to   change the tunnel session's flowspec parameters.  In this case Rexit   sends a tunnel session RESV, including a RESV_CONFIRM object.   In the case of a "hard pipe" tunnel, a new end-to-end reservation or   change in the level of resources requested by an existing reservation   may cause the total resource level needed by the end-to-end   reservations to exceed the level of resources reserved by the tunnel   reservation. This event should be treated as an admission control   failure, identically to the case where RSVP requests exceed the level   of resources available over a hardware link. A RESV_ERR message with   Error Code set to 01 (Admission Control failure), should be sent back   to the originator of the end-to-end RESV message.   If a RESV CONFIRM response arrives, the original RESV is encapsulated   and sent through the tunnel. If the updated tunnel reservation fails,   Rexit must send a RESV ERR to the originator of the end-to-end RESV   message, using the error code and value fields from the ERROR_SPEC   object of the received tunnel session RESV ERR message. Note that the   pre-existing reservations through the tunnel stay in place. Rexit   continues refreshing the tunnel RESV using the old flowspec.   Tunnel session state for a "soft pipe" may also be adjusted when an   end-to-end reservation is deleted.  The tunnel session gets reduced   whenever one of the end-to-end sessions using the tunnel goes away   (or gets reduced itself). However even when the last end-to-end   session bound to that tunnel goes away, the configured tunnel session   remains active, perhaps with a configured minimal flowspec.   Note that it will often be appropriate to use some hysteresis in the   adjustment of the tunnel reservation parameters, rather than   adjusting the tunnel reservation up and down with each arriving or   departing end-to-end reservation.  Doing this will require the tunnel   exit router to keep track of the resources allocated to the tunnel   (the tunnel flowspec) and the resources actually in use by end-to-end   reservations (the sum or statistical sum of the end-to-end   reservation flowspecs) separately.   When an end-to-end RESV TEAR is received by Rexit, it encapsulates   and forwards the message to Rentry. If the end-to-end session had   created a dynamic tunnel session, then a RESV TEAR for the   corresponding tunnel session is send by Rexit.Terzis, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 16]RFC 2746             RSVP Operation Over IP Tunnels         January 20004.2.4.  Handling of End-to-End RESV Messages at Rentry.   If the RESV message received is a refresh of an existing reservation   then Rentry updates the reservation state and forwards the message   upstream. On the other hand, if this is the first RESV message for   this end-to-end session and a NODE_CHAR object with the T bit set is   present, Rentry should initiate the mapping between this end-to-end   session and some (possibly new) tunnel session. This mapping is based   on some or all of the contents of the end-to-end PATH message, the   contents of the end-to-end RESV message, and local policies. For   example, there could be different tunnel sessions based on the   bandwidth or delay requirements of end-to-end sessions)   If Rentry decides that this end-to-end session should be mapped to an   existing configured tunnel session, it binds this end-to-end session   to that tunnel session.   If this end-to-end RSVP session is allowed to set up a new tunnel   session, Rentry sets up tunnel session PATH state as if it were a   source of data by starting to send tunnel-session PATH messages to   Rexit, which is treated as the unicast destination of the data. The   Tspec in this new PATH message is computed from the original PATH   message by adjusting the Tspec parameters to include the tunnel   overhead of the encapsulation of data packets. In this case Rentry   should also send a PATH message from the end-to-end session this time   containing the SESSION_ASSOC object linking the two sessions. The   receipt of this PATH message by Rexit will trigger an update of the   end-to-end Path state which in turn will have the effect of Rexit   sending a tunnel RESV message, allocating resources inside the   tunnel.   The last case is when the end-to-end session is not allowed to use   the tunnel resources. In this case no association is created between   this end-to-end session and a tunnel session and no new tunnel   session is created.   One limitation of our scheme is that the first RESV message of an   end-to-end session determines the mapping between that end-to-end   session and its corresponding session over the tunnel. Moreover as   long as the reservation is active this mapping cannot change.Terzis, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 17]RFC 2746             RSVP Operation Over IP Tunnels         January 20005.  Forwarding Data   When data packets arrive at the tunnel entry point Rentry, Rentry   must decide whether to forward the packets using the normal IP-in-IP   tunnel encapsulation or the IP+UDP encapsulation expected by the   tunnel session.  This decision is made by determining whether there   is a resource reservation (not just PATH state) actually in place for   the tunnel session bound to the arriving packet, that is, whether the   packet matches any active filterspec.   If a reservation is in place, it means that both Rentry and Rexit are   RSVP-tunneling aware routers, and the data will be correctly   decapsulated at Rexit.   If no tunnel session reservation is in place, the data should be   encapsulated in the tunnel's normal format, regardless of whether   end-to-end PATH state covering the data is present.6.  Details6.1.  Selecting UDP port numbers   There may be multiple end-to-end RSVP sessions between the two end   points Rentry and Rexit. These sessions are distinguished by the   source UDP port. Other components of the session ID, the source and   destination IP addresses and the destination UDP port, are identical   for all such sessions.   The source UDP port is chosen by the tunnel entry point Rentry when   it establishes the initial PATH state for a new tunnel session. The   source UDP port associated with the new session is then conveyed to   Rexit by the SESSION_ASSOC object.   The destination UDP port used in tunnel sessions should the one   assigned by IANA (363).6.2.  Error Reporting   When a tunnel session PATH message encounters an error, it is   reported back to Rentry. Rentry must relay the error report back to   the original source of the end-to-end session.   When a tunnel session RESV request fails, an error message is   returned to Rexit. Rexit must treat this as an error in crossing the   logical link (the tunnel) and forward the error message back to the   end host.Terzis, et al.              Standards Track                    [Page 18]RFC 2746             RSVP Operation Over IP Tunnels         January 20006.3.  MTU Discovery   Since the UDP encapsulated packets should not be fragmented, tunnel   entry routers must support tunnel MTU discovery as discussed in   section 5.1 of [IP4INIP4]. Alternatively, the Path MTU Discovery   mechanism discussed in RFC 2210 [RFC2210] can be used.6.4.  Tspec and Flowspec Calculations   As multiple End-to-End sessions can be mapped to a single tunnel   session, there is the need to compute the aggregate Tspec of all the   senders of those End-to-End sessions. This aggregate Tspec will the   Tspec of the representative tunnel session. The same operation needs   to be performed for flowspecs of End-to-End reservations arriving at   Rexit.   The semantics of these operations are not addressed here.  The   simplest way to do them is to compute a sum of the end-to-end Tspecs,   as is defined in the specifications of the Controlled-Load and   Guaranteed services (found at [RFC2211] and [RFC2212] respectively).   However, it may also be appropriate to compute the aggregate   reservation level for the tunnel using a more sophisticated   statistical or measurement-based computation.7.  IPSEC Tunnels   In the case where the IP-in-IP tunnel supports IPSEC (especially ESP   in Tunnel-Mode with or without AH) then the Tunnel Session uses the   GPI SESSION and GPI SENDER_TEMPLATE/FILTER_SPEC as defined in   [RSVPESP] for the PATH and RESV messages.   Data packets are not encapsulated with a UDP header since the SPI can   be used by the intermediate nodes for classification purposes.   Notice that user oriented keying must be used between Rentry and   Rexit, so that different SPIs are assigned to data packets that have   reservation and "best effort" packets, as well as packets that belong   to different Tunnel Sessions if those are supported.8.  RSVP Support for Multicast and Multipoint Tunnels

⌨️ 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 + -