⭐ 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

📄 rfc1726.txt

📁 中、英文RFC文档大全打包下载完全版 .
💻 TXT
📖 第 1 页 / 共 5 页
字号:
   * It is easier to experiment with new protocols and services and then     roll out intermediate and final results in a controlled fashion.   * By eliminating a single point of control, a single point of failure     is also eliminated, making it much less likely that the entire     network will fail.   * It allows the administrative tasks for the network to be more     widely distributed.   An example of the benefits of this "Cooperative Anarchy" can be seen   in the benefits derived from using the Domain Naming System over the   original HOSTS.TXT system.5. Criteria   This section enumerates the criteria against which we suggest the IP   The Next Generation proposals be evaluated.   Each criterion is presented in its own section. The first paragraph   of each section is a short, one or two sentence statement of the   criterion.  Additional paragraphs then explain the criterion in more   detail, clarify what it does and does not say and provide some   indication of its relative importance.   Also, each criterion includes a subsection called "Time Frame".  This   is intended to give a rough indication of when the authors believe   that the particular criterion will become "important".  We believe   that if an element of technology is significant enough to include in   this document then we probably understand the technology enough to   predict how important that technology will be.  In general, these   time frames indicate that, within the desired time frame, we should   be able to get an understanding of how the feature will be added to a   protocol, perhaps after discussions with the engineers doing the   development.  Time Frame is not a deployment schedule since   deployment schedules depend on non-technical issues, such as vendors   determining whether a market exists, users fitting new releases into   their systems, and so on.Partridge and Kastenholz                                        [Page 6]RFC 1726                IPng Technical Criteria            December 19945.1 Scale   CRITERION      The IPng Protocol must scale to allow the identification and      addressing of at least 10**12 end systems (and preferably much      more).  The IPng Protocol, and its associated routing protocols      and architecture must allow for at least 10**9 individual networks      (and preferably more).  The routing schemes must scale at a rate      that is less than the square root of the number of constituent      networks [10].   DISCUSSION      The initial, motivating, purpose of the IPng effort is to allow      the Internet to grow beyond the size constraints imposed by the      current IPv4 addressing and routing technologies.      Both aspects of scaling are important.  If we can't route then      connecting all these hosts is worthless, but without connected      hosts, there's no point in routing, so we must scale in both      directions.      In any proposal, particular attention must be paid to describing      the routing hierarchy, how the routing and addressing will be      organized, how different layers of the routing interact, and the      relationship between addressing and routing.      Particular attention must be paid to describing what happens when      the size of the network approaches these limits. How are network,      forwarding, and routing performance affected? Does performance      fall off or does the network simply stop as the limit is neared.      This criterion is the essential problem motivating the transition      to IPng.  If the proposed protocol does not satisfy this criteria,      there is no point in considering it.      We note that one of the white papers solicited for the IPng      process [5] indicates that 10**12 end nodes is a reasonable      estimate based on the expected number of homes in the world and      adding two orders of magnitude for "safety".  However, this white      paper treats each home in the world as an end-node of a world-wide      Internet.  We believe that each home in the world will in fact be      a network of the world-wide Internet.  Therefore, if we take [5]'s      derivation of 10**12 as accurate, and change their assumption that      a home will be an end-node to a home being a network, we may      expect that there will be the need to support at least 10**12      networks, with the possibility of supporting up to 10**15 end-      nodes.Partridge and Kastenholz                                        [Page 7]RFC 1726                IPng Technical Criteria            December 1994   Time Frame      Any IPng proposal should be able to show immediately that it has      an architecture for the needed routing protocols, addressing      schemes, abstraction techniques, algorithms, data structures, and      so on that can support growth to the required scales.      Actual development, specification, and deployment of the needed      protocols can be deferred until IPng deployment has extended far      enough to require such protocols.  A proposed IPng should be able      to demonstrate ahead of time that it can scale as needed.5.2 Topological Flexibility   CRITERION      The routing architecture and protocols of IPng must allow for many      different network topologies.  The routing architecture and      protocols must not assume that the network's physical structure is      a tree.   DISCUSSION      As the Internet becomes ever more global and ubiquitous, it will      develop new and different topologies. We already see cases where      the network hierarchy is very "broad" with many subnetworks, each      with only a few hosts and where it is very "narrow", with few      subnetworks each with many hosts.  We can expect these and other      topological forms in the future.  Furthermore, since we expect      that IPng will allow for many more levels of hierarchy than are      allowed under IPv4, we can expect very "tall" and very "short"      topologies as well.      Constituent organizations of the Internet should be allowed to      structure their internal topologies in any manner they see fit.      Within reasonable implementation limits, organizations should be      allowed to structure their addressing in any manner.  We      specifically wish to point out that if the network's topology or      addressing is hierarchical, constituent organizations should be      able to allocate to themselves as many levels of hierarchy as they      wish.      It is very possible that the diameter of the Internet will grow to      be extremely large; perhaps larger than 256 hops.      Neither the current, nor the future, Internet will be physically      structured as a tree, nor can we assume that connectivity can      occur only between certain points in the graph.  The routing and      addressing architectures must allow for multiply connected      networks and be able to utilize multiple paths for any reason,      including redundancy, load sharing, type- and quality-of-servicePartridge and Kastenholz                                        [Page 8]RFC 1726                IPng Technical Criteria            December 1994      differentiation.   Time Frame      We believe that Topological Flexibility is an inherent element of      a protocol and therefore should be immediately demonstrable in an      IPng proposal.5.3 Performance   CRITERION      A state of the art, commercial grade router must be able to      process and forward IPng traffic at speeds capable of fully      utilizing common, commercially available, high-speed media at the      time.  Furthermore, at a minimum, a host must be able to achieve      data transfer rates with IPng comparable to the rates achieved      with IPv4, using similar levels of host resources.   DISCUSSION      Network media speeds are constantly increasing.  It is essential      that the Internet's switching elements (routers) be able to keep      up with the media speeds.      We limit this requirement to commercially available routers and      media.  If some network site can obtain a particular media      technology "off the shelf", then it should also be able to obtain      the needed routing technology "off the shelf." One can always go      into some laboratory or research center and find newer, faster,      technologies for network media and for routing.  We do believe,      however, that IPng should be routable at a speed sufficient to      fully utilize the fastest available media, though that might      require specially built, custom, devices.      We expect that more and more services will be available over the      Internet. It is not unreasonable, therefore, to expect that the      ratio of "local" traffic (i.e., the traffic that stays on one's      local network) to "export" traffic (i.e., traffic destined to or      sourced from a network other than one's own local network) will      change, and the percent of export traffic will increase.      We note that the host performance requirement should not be taken      to imply that IPng need only be as good as IPv4.  If an IPng      candidate can achieve better performance with equivalent resources      (or equivalent transfer rates with fewer resources) vis-a-vis IPv4      then so much the better.  We also observe that many researchers      believe that a proper IPng router should be capable of routing      IPng traffic over links at speeds that are capable of fully      utilizing an ATM switch on the link.Partridge and Kastenholz                                        [Page 9]RFC 1726                IPng Technical Criteria            December 1994      Some developments indicate that the use of very high speed point-      to-point connections may become commonplace.  In particular, [5]      indicates that OC-3 speeds may be widely used in the Cable TV      Industry and there may be many OC-3 speed lines connecting to      central switching elements.      Processing of the IPng header, and subsequent headers (such as the      transport header), can be made more efficient by aligning fields      on their natural boundaries and making header lengths integral      multiples of typical word lengths (32, 64, and 128 bits have been      suggested) in order to preserve alignment in following headers.      We point out that optimizing the header's fields and lengths only      to today's processors may not be sufficient for the long term.      Processor word and cache-line lengths, and memory widths are      constantly increasing.  In doing header optimizations, the      designer should predict word-widths one or two CPU generations      into the future and optimize accordingly. If IPv4 and TCP had been      optimized for processors common when they were designed, they      would be very efficient for 6502s and Z-80s.   Time Frame      An IPng proposal must provide a plausible argument of how it will      scale up in performance.  (Obviously no one can completely predict      the future, but the idea is to illustrate that if technology      trends in processor performance and memory performance continue,      and perhaps using techniques like parallelism, there is reason to      believe the proposed IPng will scale as technology scales).5.4 Robust Service   CRITERION      The network service and its associated routing and control      protocols must be robust.   DISCUSSION      Murphy's Law applies to networking.  Any proposed IPng protocol      must be well-behaved in the face of malformed packets, mis-      information, and occasional failures of links, routers and hosts.      IPng should perform gracefully in response to willful management      and configuration mistakes (i.e., service outages should be      minimized).      Putting this requirement another way, IPng must make it possible      to continue the Internet tradition of being conservative in what      is sent, but liberal in what one is willing to receive.Partridge and Kastenholz                                       [Page 10]RFC 1726                IPng Technical Criteria            December 1994      We note that IPv4 is reasonably robust and any proposed IPng must      be at least as robust as IPv4.      Hostile attacks on the network layer and Byzantine failure modes      must be dealt with in a safe and graceful manner.      We note that Robust Service is, in some form, a part of security      and vice-versa.      The detrimental effects of failures, errors, buggy      implementations, and misconfigurations must be localized as much      as possible.  For example, misconfiguring a workstation's IP      Address should not break the routing protocols.  in the event of      misconfigurations, IPng must to be able to detect and at least      warn, if not work around, any misconfigurations.      Due to its size, complexity, decentralized administration, error-      prone users and administrators, and so on, The Internet is a very

⌨️ 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 + -