⭐ 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

📄 rfc1127.txt

📁 中、英文RFC文档大全打包下载完全版 .
💻 TXT
📖 第 1 页 / 共 3 页
字号:
   -    Telnet interrupt/SYNCH usage   [AS 3.2.4]   -    FTP restart facility   [AS 4.1.3.4]   -    DNS efficiency issues   [AS 6.1.3.3]   -    DNS user interface: aliases and search lists   [AS 6.1.4.3]   There are some other areas where the working group tried to produce a   more extended discussion but was not totally successful; one example   is error logging (see Appendix I below).Braden                                                          [Page 7]RFC 1127           Perspective on Host Requirements         October 19893.  OPEN ISSUES   For some issues, the disagreement was so serious that the working   group was unable to reach a consensus.  In each case, some spoke for   MUST or SHOULD, while others spoke with equal fervor for MUST NOT or   SHOULD NOT.  As a result, the HR RFCs try to summarize the differing   viewpoints but take no stand; the corresponding requirements are   given as MAY or OPTIONAL.  The most notorious of these contentious   issues are as follows.   -    Hosts forwarding source-routed datagrams, even though the hosts        are not otherwise acting as gateways   [CL 3.3.5]   -    The multihoming model   [CL 3.3.4]   -    ICMP Echo Requests to a broadcast or multicast address        [CL 3.2.2.6]   -    Host-only route caching   [CL 3.3.1.3]   -    Host wiretapping routing protocols   [CL 3.3.1.4]   -    TCP sending an ACK when it receives a segment that appears to be        out-of-order   [CL 4.2.2.21]   There was another set of controversial issues for which the HR RFCs   did take a compromise stand, to allow the disputed functions but   circumscribe their use.  In many of these cases, there were one or   more significant voices for banning the feature altogether.   -    Host acting as gateways   [CL 3.1]   -    Trailer encapsulation   [CL 2.3.1]   -    Delayed TCP acknowledgments   [CL 4.2.3.2]   -    TCP Keep-alives   [CL 4.2.3.6]   -    Ignoring UDP checksums   [CL 4.1.3.4]   -    Telnet Go-Aheads   [AS 3.2.2]   -    Allowing 8-bit data in Telnet NVT mode   [AS 3.2.5]Braden                                                          [Page 8]RFC 1127           Perspective on Host Requirements         October 19894.  OTHER FUTURE WORK   General Issues:   (1)  Host Initialization Procedures      When a host system boots or otherwise initializes, it needs      certain network configuration information in order to communicate;      e.g., its own IP address(es) and address mask(s).  In the case of      a diskless workstation, obtaining this information is an essential      part of the booting process.      The ICMP Address Mask messages and the RARP (Reverse ARP) protocol      each provide individual pieces of configuration information.  The      working group felt that such piecemeal solutions are a mistake,      and that a comprehensive approach to initialization would result      in a uniform mechanism to provide all the required configuration      information at once.  The HR working group recommends that a new      working group be established to develop a unified approach to      system initialization.   (2)  Configuration Options      Vendors, users, and network administrators all want host software      that is "plug-and-play".  Unfortunately, the working group was      often forced to require additional configuration parameters to      satisfy interoperability, functionality, and/or efficiency needs      [1.2.4 in either RFC].  The working group was fully aware of the      drawbacks of configuration parameters, but based upon extensive      experience with existing implementations, it felt that the      flexibility was sometimes more important than installation      simplicity.      Some of the configuration parameters are forced for      interoperability with earlier, incorrect implementations.  Very      little can be done to ease this problem, although retirement of      the offending systems will gradually solve it.  However, it would      be desirable to re-examine the other required configuration      options, in an attempt to develop ways to eliminate some of them.   Link-Layer Issues:   (2)  ARP Cache Maintenance      "Proxy ARP" is a link-layer mechanism for IP routing, and its use      results in difficult problems in managing the ARP cache.      Even without proxy ARP, the management dynamics of the IP routeBraden                                                          [Page 9]RFC 1127           Perspective on Host Requirements         October 1989      cache interact in subtle ways with transport-layer dynamics;      introducing routing via proxy ARP brings a third protocol layer      into the problem, complicating the inter-layer dynamics still      further.      The algorithms for maintaining the ARP cache need to be studied      and experimented with, to create more complete and explicit      algorithms and requirements.   (3)  FDDI Bit-order in MAC addresses      On IEEE 802.3 or 802.4 LAN, the MAC address in the header uses the      same bit-ordering as transmission of the address as data.  On      802.5 and FDDI networks, however, the MAC address in the header is      in a different bit-ordering from the equivalent 6 bytes sent as      data.  This will make it hard to do MAC-level bridging between      FDDI and 802.3 LAN's, for example, although gateways (IP routers)      can still be used.      The working group concluded that this is a serious but subtle      problem with no obvious fix, and that resolving it was beyond the      scope of the HR working group.   IP-Layer Issues   (4)  Dead Gateway Detection      A fundamental requirement for a host is to be able to detect when      the first-hop gateway has failed.  The early TCP/IP      experimentation was based on the ARPANET, which provided explicit      notification of gateway failure; as a result, dead gateway      detection algorithms were not much considered at that time.  The      very general guidelines presented by Dave Clark [RFC-816] are      inadequate for implementors.  The first attempt at applying these      guidelines was the introduction of universal gateway pinging by      TOPS-20 systems; this quickly proved to be a major generator of      ARPANET traffic, and was squelched.  The most widely used      implementation of the Internet protocols, 4.2BSD, solved the      problem in an extra-architectural manner, by letting the host      wiretap the gateway routing protocol (RIP).  As a result of this      history, the HR working group was faced with an absence of      documentated techniques that a host conforming to the Internet      architecture could use to detect dead gateways.      After extensive discussion, the working group agreed on the      outline of an appropriate algorithm.  A detailed algorithm was in      fact written down, to validate the discussion in the HR RFCs.      This algorithm, or a better one, should be tried experimentallyBraden                                                         [Page 10]RFC 1127           Perspective on Host Requirements         October 1989      and documented in a new RFC.   (5)  Gateway Discovery      A host needs to discover the IP addresses of gateways on its      connected networks.  One approach, begun but not finished by      members of the HR working group, would be to define a new pair of      ICMP query messages for gateway discovery.  In the future, gateway      discovery should be considered as part of the complete host      initialization problem.   (6)  MTU Discovery      Members of the HR working group designed IP options that a host      could use to discover the minimum MTU of a particular Internet      path [RFC-1063].  To be useful, the Probe MTU options would have      to be implemented in all gateways, which is an obstacle to its      adoption.  Code written to use these options has never been      tested.  This work should be carried forward; an effective MTU      choice will become increasingly important for efficient Internet      service.   (7)  Routing Advice from Gateways      A working group member produced a draft specification for ICMP      messages a host could use to ask gateways for routing advice      [Lekashman].  While this is not of such pressing importance as the      issues listed previously, it deserves further consideration and      perhaps experimentation.   (8)  Dynamic TTL Discovery      Serious connectivity problems have resulted from host software      that has too small a TTL value built into the code.  HR-CL      specifies that TTL values must be configurable, to allow TTL to be      increased if required for communication in a future Internet;      conformance with this requirement would solve the current      problems.  However, configurable parameters are an operational      headache, so it has been suggested that a host could have an      algorithm to determine the TTL ("Internet diameter") dynamically.      Several algorithms have been suggested, but considerably more work      would be required to validate them.  This is a lower-priority      problem than issues (4)-(6).   (9)  Dynamic Discovery of Reassembly Timeout Time      The maximum time for retaining a partially-reassembled datagram is      another parameter that creates a potential operational headache.Braden                                                         [Page 11]RFC 1127           Perspective on Host Requirements         October 1989      An appropriate reassembly timeout value must balance available      reassembly buffer space against reliable reassembly.  The best      value thus may depend upon the system and upon subtle delay      properties (delay dispersion) of the Internet.  Again, dynamic      discovery could be desirable.   (10) Type-of-Service Routing in Hosts      As pointed out previously, the HR RFCs contain a number of      provisions designed to make Type-of-Service (TOS) useful.  This      includes the suggestion that the route cache should have a place      or specifying the TOS of a particular route.  However, host      algorithms for using TOS specifications need to be developed and      documented.   (11) Using Subnets      An RFC is needed to provide a thorough explanation of the      implications of subnetting for Internet protocols and for network      administration.   Transport-Layer Issues:   (12) RST Message      It has been proposed that TCP RST (Reset) segments can contain      text to provide an explicit explanation of the reason for the      particular RST.  A proposal has been drafted [CLynn].   (13) Performance Algorithms      HR-CL contains a number of requirements on TCP performance      algorithms; Van Jacobson's slow start and congestion avoidance,      Karn's algorithm, Nagle's algorithm, and SWS prevention at the      sender and receiver.  Implementors of new TCPs really need more      guidance than could possibly be included in the HR RFCs.  The      working group suggested that an RFC on TCP performance is needed,      to describe each of these issues more deeply and especially to      explain how they fit together.      Another issue raised by the HR RFCs is the need for validation (or      rejection) of Van Jacobson's fast retransmit algorithm.   Application-Layer Issues:   (14) Proposed FTP extensions      A number of minor extensions proposed for FTP should be processedBraden                                                         [Page 12]RFC 1127           Perspective on Host Requirements         October 1989      and accepted or rejected.  We are aware of the following      proposals:      (a)  Atomic Store Command         The FTP specification leaves undefined the disposition of a         partial file created when an FTP session fails during a store         operation.  It was suggested that this ambiguity could be         resolved by defining a new store command, Store Atomic (STOA).         The receiver would delete the partial file if the transfer         failed before the final data-complete reply had been sent.         This assumes the use of a transfer mode (e.g., block) in which         end-of-file can be distinguished from TCP connection failure,         of course.      (b)  NDIR Command         "NDIR would be a directories-only analogue to the NLST command.         Upon receiving an NDIR command an FTP server would return a         list of the subdirectories to the specified directory or file         group; or of the current directory if no argument was sent.         ... The existing NLST command allows user FTPs to implement         user-interface niceties such as a "multiple get" command.  It         also allows a selective (as opposed to generative) file-naming         user interface: the user can pick the desired file out of a         list instead of typing its name." [Matthews]         However, the interface needs to distinguish files from         directories.  Up to now, such interfaces have relied on a bug         in many FTP servers, which have included directory names in the         list returned by NLST.  As hosts come into conformance with         HR-AS, we need an NDIR command to return directory names.      (c)  Adaptive Compression         It has been suggested that a sophisticated adaptive data         compression algorithm, like that provided by the Unix         "compress" command, should be added as an alternative FTP         transfer mode.   (15) SMTP: Global Mail Addressing      While writing requirements for electronic mail, the working group      was urged to set rules for SMTP and RFC-822 that would be      universal, applicable not only to the Internet environment but      also to the other mail environments that use one or both of these      protocols.  The working group chose to ignore this Siren call, and      instead limit the HR RFC to requirements specific to the Internet.Braden                                                         [Page 13]RFC 1127           Perspective on Host Requirements         October 1989      However, the networking world would certainly benefit from some      global agreements on mail routing.  Strong passions are lurking      here.   (16) DNS: Fully Replacing hosts.txt      As noted in HR-AS [AS 6.1.3.8], the DNS does not yet incorporate      all the potentially-useful information included in the DDN NIC's      hosts.txt file.  The DNS should be expanded to cover the hosts.txt      information.  RFC-1101 [RFC-1101] is a step in the right      direction, but more work is needed.5.  SUMMARY   We have summarized the results of the Host Requirements Working   Group, and listed a set of issues in Internet host protocols that

⌨️ 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 + -