NSIS T. Tsenov Internet-Draft H. Tschofenig Intended status: Informational Nokia Siemens Networks Expires: August 10, 2010 X. Fu Univ. Goettingen C. Aoun E. Davies Folly Consulting February 10, 2010 GIST State Machine draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-statemachine-09.txt Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 10, 2010. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 1] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 Contributions published or made publicly available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other than English. Abstract This document describes the state machines for the General Internet Signaling Transport (GIST). The states of GIST nodes for a given flow and their transitions are presented in order to illustrate how GIST may be implemented. Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 2] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Notational conventions used in state diagrams . . . . . . . 4 4. State Machine Symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Common Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1 Common Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.2 Common Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. State machines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6.1 Diagram notations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6.2 State machine for GIST querying node . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6.3 State machine for GIST responding node . . . . . . . . . . 15 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 11.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 11.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Appendix A. ASCII versions of the state diagrams . . . . . . . . 20 A.1 State machine for GIST querying node (Figure 2) . . . . 20 A.2 State Machine for GIST responding node (Figure 3) . . . 23 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 3] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 1. Introduction The state machines described in this document are illustrative of how the GIST protocol defined in [1] may be implemented for the GIST nodes in different locations of a flow path. Where there are differences - [1] is authoritative. The state machines are informative only. Implementations may achieve the same results using different methods. There are two types of possible entities for GIST signaling: - GIST querying node - GIST node that initiates the discovery of the next peer; - GIST responding node - GIST node that is the discovered next peer; We describe a set of state machines for these entities to illustrate how GIST may be implemented. 2. Terminology The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [2]. 3. Notational conventions used in state diagrams The following text is reused from [3] and the state diagrams are based on the conventions specified in [4], Section 8.2.1. Additional state machine details are taken from [5]. The complete text is reproduced here: State diagrams are used to represent the operation of the protocol by a number of cooperating state machines each comprising a group of connected, mutually exclusive states. Only one state of each machine can be active at any given time. All permissible transitions between states are represented by arrows, the arrowhead denoting the direction of the possible transition. Labels attached to arrows denote the condition(s) that must be met in order for the transition to take place. All conditions are expressions that evaluate to TRUE or FALSE; if a condition evaluates to TRUE, then the condition is met. The label UCT denotes an unconditional transition (i.e., UCT always evaluates to TRUE). A transition that is global in nature (i.e., a transition that occurs from any of the possible states if the condition attached to the arrow is met) is denoted by an open arrow; i.e., no specific state is Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 4] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 identified as the origin of the transition. When the condition associated with a global transition is met, it supersedes all other exit conditions including UCT. The special global condition BEGIN supersedes all other global conditions, and once asserted remains asserted until all state blocks have executed to the point that variable assignments and other consequences of their execution remain unchanged. On entry to a state, the procedures defined for the state (if any) are executed exactly once, in the order that they appear on the page. Each action is deemed to be atomic; i.e., execution of a procedure completes before the next sequential procedure starts to execute. No procedures execute outside of a state block. The procedures in only one state block execute at a time, even if the conditions for execution of state blocks in different state machines are satisfied, and all procedures in an executing state block complete execution before the transition to and execution of any other state block occurs, i.e., the execution of any state block appears to be atomic with respect to the execution of any other state block and the transition condition to that state from the previous state is TRUE when execution commences. The order of execution of state blocks in different state machines is undefined except as constrained by their transition conditions. A variable that is set to a particular value in a state block retains this value until a subsequent state block executes a procedure that modifies the value. On completion of all of the procedures within a state, all exit conditions for the state (including all conditions associated with global transitions) are evaluated continuously until one of the conditions is met. The label ELSE denotes a transition that occurs if none of the other conditions for transitions from the state are met (i.e., ELSE evaluates to TRUE if all other possible exit conditions from the state evaluate to FALSE). Where two or more exit conditions with the same level of precedence become TRUE simultaneously, the choice as to which exit condition causes the state transition to take place is arbitrary. In addition to the above notation, there are a couple of clarifications specific to this document. First, all boolean variables are initialized to FALSE before the state machine execution begins. Second, the following notational shorthand is specific to this document: = | | ... Execution of a statement of this form will result in having a value of exactly one of the expressions. The logic for which of those expressions gets executed is outside of the state Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 5] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 machine and could be environmental, configurable, or based on another state machine such as that of the method. 4. State Machine Symbols ( ) Used to force the precedence of operators in Boolean expressions and to delimit the argument(s) of actions within state boxes. ; Used as a terminating delimiter for actions within state boxes. Where a state box contains multiple actions, the order of execution follows the normal English language conventions for reading text. = Assignment action. The value of the expression to the right of the operator is assigned to the variable to the left of the operator. Where this operator is used to define multiple assignments, e.g., a = b = X the action causes the value of the expression following the right-most assignment operator to be assigned to all of the variables that appear to the left of the right-most assignment operator. ! Logical NOT operator. && Logical AND operator. || Logical OR operator. if...then... Conditional action. If the Boolean expression following the if evaluates to TRUE, then the action following the then is executed. { statement 1, ... statement N } Compound statement. Braces are used to group statements that are executed together as if they were a single statement. != Inequality. Evaluates to TRUE if the expression to the left of the operator is not equal in value to the expression to the right. == Equality. Evaluates to TRUE if the expression to the left of the operator is equal in value to the expression to the right. Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 6] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 > Greater than. Evaluates to TRUE if the value of the expression to the left of the operator is greater than the value of the expression to the right. <= Less than or equal to. Evaluates to TRUE if the value of the expression to the left of the operator is either less than or equal to the value of the expression to the right. ++ Increment the preceding integer operator by 1. + Arithmetic addition operator. & Bitwise AND operator. 5. Common Rules Throughout the document we use terms defined in the [1], such as Query, Response, Confirm. State machine represents handling of GIST messages that match a Message Routing State's MRI, NSLPID and SID and with no protocol errors. Separate parallel instances of the state machines should handle messages for different Message Routing States. The state machine states represent the upstream/downstream peers states of the Message Routing State. For simplification not all objects included in a message are shown. Only those that are significant for the case are shown. State machines do not present handling of messages that are not significant for management of the states. Presented in this document state machines do not cover all functions of a GIST node. Functionality of message forwarding, transmission of NSLP data without MRS establishment and providing of the received messages to the appropriate MRS, we refer as "Lower level pre- processing" step. Pre-processing provides to the appropriate MRS FSM only the messages which are matched against waiting Query/Response cookies, or established MRS MRI+NSLPID+SID primary key. This is presented by "rx_*" events in the state machines. Management of a MA is considered in the document (e.g., tg_Establish_MA, tg_MA_established events), but its FSM is not Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 7] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 explicitly presented. 5.1 Common Procedures Tg_SendMsg: NSLP/GIST API message that request transmission of a NSLP message. Tg_SetStateLifetime(time_period): NSLP/GIST API message providing info for the Lifetime of an RS, required by the application. "Time_period = 0" represents the cancellation of established RSs/MAs (invoked by NSLP application). Tg_MessageStatus: NSLP/GIST API message informing NSLP application of unsuccessful delivery of a message Tg_RecvMsg: NSLP/GIST API message that provides received message to the NSLP Tg_NetworkNotification: NSLP/GIST API message that informs NSLP for change in MRS Tx_Query: Transmit of Query message Tx_Response: Transmit of Response message Tx_Confirm: Transmit of Confirm message Rx_Query: Receive of Query message Rx_Response: Receive of Response message Rx_Confirm: Receive of Confirm message Tx_Error: Transmit of Error message Rx_Error: Receive of Error message Queue NSLP info: Save NLSP messages in a queue until a required MA association is Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 8] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 established Tx_Data: Transmit of Data message Rx_Data: Receive of Data message T_Inactive_QNode: Message Routing State lifetime timer in Querying Node T_Expired_RNode: Message Routing State lifetime timer in Responding Node T_Refresh_QNode: Message Routing State refresh timer in Querying Node T_No_Response: Timer for the waiting period for Response message in Querying Node T_No_Confirm: Timer for the waiting period for Confirm message in Responding Node Install downstream/upstream MRS: Install new Message Routing State and save the corespoding peer state info (IP address and UDP port or pointer to the used MA) for the current Message Routing State or update the coresponding peer state info. DELETE MRS: Delete installed downstream/upstream peer's info for the current Message Routing State and delete the Message Routing State if required. Established MA: A Message Association (MA) is established between the current node and its upstream peer. The initiator for the establishment is the upstream peer. Re-use existing MA: An existing MA between the current node and its peer is re-used. DELETE MA: Delete/disconnect used MA. Stop using shared MA: Stop using shared MA. If the shared MA is no more used by any Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 9] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 other MRSs, it depends on the local policy whether it is deleted or kept. REFRESH MRS: Refreshes installed MRS. Tg_MA_Error: Error event with used MA. Tg_InvalidRoutingState: Notification from NSLP application for path change Tg_Establish_MA: Trigers establishment of MA. Tg_MA_Established: MA has been successfully established. Tg_ERROR: General Error event / system level error. No_MRS_Installed: Error response, send by the Responding node indicating lost Confirm message. 5.2 Common Variables It is assumed that the type of mode and destination info (which need to be taken from the application parameters and local GIST policy)is provided. This is represented by the common variables Dmode, Cmode, MAinfo, MApresent and Refresh. Cmode: The message MUST be transmitted in Cmode. This is specified by "Message transfer attributes" set to any of the following values: "Reliability" is set to TRUE. "Security" is set to values that request secure handling of a message. "Local processing" is set to values that require services offered by Cmode (e.g., congestion control). [1] Dmode: The message MUST be transmitted in Dmode. This is specified by local policy rules and in case that the "Message transfer attributes" are not set to any of the following values: Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 10] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 "Reliability" is set to TRUE. "Security" is set to values that request special security handling of a message. "Local processing" is set to values that require services offered by Cmode [1] MAinfo: GIST message parameters describing the required MA or proposed MA e.g. "Stack-proposal" and "Stack-Configuration-Data". NSLPdata: NSLP application data. RespCookie: Responder Cookie that is being sent by the Responding node with the Response message in case that its local policy requires a confirmation from the querying node. ConfirmRequired: Confirm message is required by the local policy rule for installation of the new MRS. NewPeer: Response message is received from new responding peer. MAexist: Existing MA will be reused. CheckPeerInfo: The sender of the received data message is matched against the installed peer info in the MRS. UpstreamPeerInstalled: Upstream peer info is installed in the MRS. Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 11] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 6. State machines The following section presents the state machine diagrams of GIST peers. 6.1 Diagram notations +--------------------------------+ | STATE | +--------------+-----------------+ | | ooooo o N o Transition N ooooo | v +--------------------------------+ | STATE | +--------------------------------+ Figure 1: Diagram notations 6.2 State machine for GIST querying node GIST querying node state machine diagram is depicted bellow. Transition description follows. For .txt version, please refer to Appendix A.1 for complete transition details (triggering event, action taken and variables status). Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 12] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 +-----------+ ooooo | Any State +----------o 18 o +-----------+ ooooo | v +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ | IDLE | +--+--------------------------------------------------------------+ | ^ ^ ^ | | | | ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo | | o 1 o o 2 o +o 3 o+ +o 4 o+ +o 5 o+ | | ooooo ooooo | ooooo | | ooooo | | ooooo | | | | | | | | | | | | | v | | v | v | v | | +-----------+-----+----------+----------+--------+ | | | Wait Response | | | +--+-------------------------------------+-------+ | | | ^ | | | | | | | | ooooo | ooooo ooooo ooooo | o 6 o | +o 5 o+ o 7 o o 8 o | ooooo | | ooooo | ooooo ooooo | | | | | | | | | | | v v | | | | +----+-------------------------------+---+ | | | | Wait MA Establishment | | | | +------------------------------+---------+ | | | ^ | | | | | | | | ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo | o 9 o o 11 o +o 13 o+ o 12 o o 10 o | ooooo ooooo | ooooo | ooooo ooooo | | | | | | | v | | | v v | +----------+----------+--------+------------------------------+---+ | Established Downstream MRS | +--+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+--------------+ | ^ | ^ | ^ | ^ | ^ | | | | | | | | | | | ooooo | | ooooo | | ooooo | | ooooo | | ooooo | +o 16 o+ +o 14 o+ +o 15 o+ +o 4 o+ +o 17 o+ ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo Figure 1: GIST Querying Node State Machine 1**) Initial request from NSLP application is received, which triggers Query messages requesting either D_mode or C_mode. Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 13] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 Depending on nodes local policy NSLP data might be piggybacked in the Query requesting D_mode. Query may carry MAinfo if C_mode transport is needed. 2) No_Response timer expires and maximum number of retries has been reached. NSLP application is notified for the GIST peer discovery failure. 3) No_Response timer expires. Query is resent. 4) Data message is received. It is checked if its sender matches the installed downstream peer info in the MRS and then processed. In WaitResponse state, this event might happen in the process of MA upgrade, when the downstream peer is still not aware of establishment of the new MA. 5) NSLP application requests sending data. NSLP data is queued, because downstream peer is not discovered or required MA is still not established. 6) Response message is received. If D_mode connection is requested or available MA can be reused for requested C_mode, the MRS is established. 7*) Response message is received. If C_mode connection must be established and there is no available MA to be reused, MA establishment is initiated and waited to be completed. 8) MA establishment failure. NSLP application is notified for unsuccessful message delivery. 9) NSLP application requests sending data and requested transport parameters require upgrade of established MRS from D_mode/C_mode to C_mode. Or NSLP application notifies GIST for path change. Downstream GIST peer discovery is initiated. 10) MRS lifetime expires or NSLP application notifies that MRS is no longer needed. MRS is deleted. If not needed, MA is deleted, too. NSLP application is notified for MRS change. 11*) Path change detected. Response message from a new downstream GIST peer is received. A new MA must be established for requested C_mode. 12*) MA is established. MRS is installed. Queued NSLP data is sent. 13) Refresh_QNode timer expires. Query message is sent. 14) NSLP application provides data for sending. It is sent via Data message towards downstream GIST peer. 15) Response message from the downstream GIST peer is received. The peer is not changed. MRS is refreshed (Refresh_QNode timer is restarted). 16) Path change detected. Response message from a new downstream GIST peer is received. D_mode is requested or existing MA can be reused for requested C_mode. 17) Sent Confirm message has not been received by downstream GIST peer. Confirm message is resent. 18) General error or system level error occurs. MRS is deleted. If not needed, MA is deleted, too. NSLP application is notified for MRS change. Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 14] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 Remarks: *) Response and Comfirm messages might be sent either in Dmode or Cmode, before or after MA establishment depending on node's local 3-way handshake policy and the availability of MAs to be reused. See draft for details. **) Depending on the local policy NSLPdata might be send as payload of Query and Confirm messages (piggybacking). 6.3 State machine for GIST responding node GIST responding node state machine diagram is depicted bellow. Transition description follows. For .txt version, please refer to Appendix A.2 for complete transition details (triggering event, action taken and variables status). Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 15] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 +-----------+ ooooo | Any State +----------o 13 o +-----------+ ooooo | v +-----------------------------------------------------------------+ | IDLE | +--+-------------------------------+------------------------------+ | ^ | ^ | | | | ooooo | ooooo ooooo ooooo o 1 o | o 2 o +o 4 o+ o 3 o ooooo | ooooo | ooooo | ooooo | | | | | | | | v | v | | | +--------------------+---------------+---+ | | | Wait Confirm | | | +---------+------------------+-----------+ | | | ^ | ^ | | | | | | | ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo | ooooo | | +o 5 o+ o 8 o o 5 o o 7 o +o 6 o+ | | ooooo | ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo | | | | | | v | v | v | +------+-------------+------------------------+-------------------+ | Established Upstream MRS | +------+-------------+-------------+------------+-----------------+ | ^ | ^ | ^ | ^ | | | | | | | | | ooooo | | ooooo | | ooooo | | ooooo | +o 9 o+ +o 11 o+ +o 12 o+ +o 10 o+ ooooo ooooo ooooo ooooo Figure 3: GIST Responding Node State Machine 1) A Query message is received. MRS is installed immediately, based on the local policy. Query message might carry piggybacked NSLP data which is provided to the NSLP application. 2) A Query message is received. Explicit Confirm message is required for MRS installation, based on the local policy. Query message might carry piggybacked NSLP data which is provided to the NSLP application. 3) No_Confirm timer expires. Note that all cases of lost handshake GIST messages are handled only by GIST querying node via resend of Query message. 4) A Query message is received again. This means that sent Response message has not been received by upstream GIST peer. Response Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 16] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 message is resent. 5) Confirm message is received which causes installation of the complete MRS or just installation of the used MA as a upstream peer info. 6) In case of lost Confirm message, data messages might be received from the upstream GIST node (it is unaware of the lost Confirm message). Response indicating the loss of the Confirm is sent back to the upstream GIST node. 7) A Query message is received with request for change of the used connection mode (from D_mode/C_mode to better C_mode) or from new upstream GIST node. Local policy requires explicit Confirm message for MRS installation. 8) MRS lifetime expires or NSLP application notifies that MRS is no longer needed. MRS is deleted. If used and not needed, MA is deleted, too. NSLP application is notified for MRS change. 9) Data for sending is received from NSLP application. NSLP data is sent if discovery process is successfully accomplished or is queued if Confirm message is still expected to confirm establishment of MA. 10) A Query message is received. If it is sent from new upstream GIST node there is path change. Local policy does not need explicit Confirm message for MRS installation. MRS data is updated. 11) A Query message is received with request for change of the used connection mode (from D_mode/C_mode to better C_mode). Local policy does not need explicit Confirm message for MRS installation. MRS data is updated. 12) A Data message is received. Data messages are accepted only if complete MRS is installed, e.g., there is installed upstream peer info. If not, then Confirm message is expected and data message wont be accepted. Response indicating the loss of the Confirm is sent back to the upstream GIST node. 13) General error or system level error occurs. MRS is deleted. If not needed, MA is deleted, too. NSLP application is notified for MRS change. 7. Security Considerations This document does not raise new security considerations. Any security concerns with GIST are likely reflected in security related NSIS work already (such as [1] or [6]). 8. IANA Considerations This document has no actions for IANA. 9. Contributors Christian Dickmann contributed to refining of the state machine since Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 17] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 01 version. 10. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Robert Hancock, Ingo Juchem, Andreas Westermaier, Alexander Zrim, Julien Abeille Youssef Abidi and Bernd Schloer for their insightful comments. Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 18] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 11. References 11.1. Normative References [1] Schulzrinne, H., "GIST: General Internet Signaling Transport", draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-20 (work in progress), December 2009. [2] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 11.2. Informative References [3] Vollbrecht, J., Eronen, P., Petroni, N., and Y. Ohba, "State Machines for Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) Peer and Authenticator", RFC4137, August 2005. [4] Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, "Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks: Port- Based Network Access Control", IEEE 802-1X-2004, December 2004. [5] Fajardo, V., Ohba, Y. and R. Marin-Lopez, "State Machines for Protocol for Carrying Authentication for Network Access (PANA)", RFC 5609, August 2009. [6] Tschofenig, H. and D. Kroeselberg, "Security Threats for NSIS", RFC 4081, June 2005. Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 19] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 Appendix A. ASCII versions of state diagrams This appendix contains the state diagrams in ASCII format. Please use the PDF version whenever possible: it is much easier to understand. For each state there is a separate table that lists in each row: - an event that triggers a transition, - actions taken as a result of the incoming event, - and the new state at which the transitions ends. A.1. State machine for GIST querying node (Figure 2) ----------- State: IDLE ----------- +Transition | |Condition |Action |State V--+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- 1) |tg_SendMsg |tx_Query |Wait ** | |start T_No_Response |Response | |Queue NSLP data | | | | 18)|Tg_ERROR |Delete MRS |IDLE | |IF (MA is used) | | | ((Delete MA)|| | | | (Stop using shared MA))| | |Tg_NetworkNotification | | | | ---+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- ----------- State: WaitResponse ----------- +Transition | |Condition |Action |State V--+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- 2) |(timeout T_No_Response) |tg_MessageStatus |IDLE |&&(MaxRetry) | | | | | 3) |(timeout T_No_Response) |Tx_Query |Wait |&&(!MaxRetry) |restart T_No_Response |Response | | | 4) |rx_Data |IF(CheckPeerInfo) |Wait | | tg_RecvMsg to Appl.|Response Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 20] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 | | | 5) |tg_SendMsg |Queue NSLP data |Wait | | |Response | | | 6) |rx_Response)|| |Install MRS |Established |(rx_Response(MAinfo)&& |IF (RespCookie) |Downstream |(MAexist)) | tx_Confirm(RespCookie)|MRS | |tx_Data(Queued NSLP data)| | | | 7) |rx_Response(MAinfo)&& |tg_Establish_MA |Wait MA * |(!MAexist) |(tx_Confirm) |Establish. | | | | | | 18)|Tg_ERROR |(Delete MRS) |IDLE | |IF (MA is used) | | | ((Delete MA)|| | | | (Stop using shared MA))| | |Tg_NetworkNotification | | | | ---+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- ----------- State: Established Downstream MRS ----------- +Transition | |Condition |Action |State V--+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- 4) |rx_Data |IF(CheckPeerInfo) |Established | | tg_RecvMsg to Appl.|Downstream | | |MRS | | | 9) |((tg_SendMsg)&&(Cmode)&&|tx_Query |Wait |(!MAexist))|| |Queue NSLP data |Response |(tg_MA_error)|| | | |(tg_InvalidRoutingState)| | | | | 10)|(timeout T_Inactive_ |Delete MRS |IDLE | QNode)|||IF (MA is used) | |(tg_SetStateLifetime(0))| (Delete MA)|| | | | (Stop using shared MA)| | |Tg_NetworkNotification | | | | 11)|(rx_Response(MAinfo)&& |((Delete MA)|| |Wait MA * |(NewPeer)&&(!MA_exist)) |(Stop using shared MA)) |Establish. Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 21] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 | |tg_Establish_MA | | |(tx_Confirm) | | | | 13)|timeout T_Refresh_QNode |tx_Query |Established | | |Downstream | | |MRS | | | 14)|tg_SendMsg |tx_Data |Established | |restart T_Inactive_QNode |Downstream | | |MRS | | | 15)|(rx_Response)&& |Refresh MRS |Established |(!NewPeer) |restart T_Inactive_QNode |Downstream | | |MRS | | | 16)|(rx_Response)|| |IF (MA is used) |Established |(rx_Response(Mainfo)&& | (Delete MA)|| |Downstream |(MAexist)))&&(NewPeer) | (Stop using shared MA)|MRS | |Install MRS | | |restart T_Inactive_QNode | | |IF (RespCookie) | | | tx_Confirm(RespCookie)| | | | 17)|rx_Response(No_MRS_ |tx_Confirm(RespCookie) |Established | installed)|tx_Data(Queued NSLP data)|Downstream | | |MRS | | | 18)|Tg_ERROR |(Delete MRS) |IDLE | |IF (MA is used) | | | ((Delete MA)|| | | | (Stop using shared MA))| | |Tg_NetworkNotification | | | | ---+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- ----------- State: Wait MA Establishment ----------- +Transition | |Condition |Action |State V--+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- 5) |tg_SendMsg |Queue NSLP data |Wait MA | | |Establish. | | | 8) |tg_MA_error |Delete MRS |IDLE | |tg_MessageStatus | Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 22] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 | | | 12)|tg_MA_Established |Install MRS |Established * | |(tx_Confirm) |Downstream | |tx_Data(Queued NSLP data)|MRS | | | 18)|Tg_ERROR |Delete MRS |IDLE | |IF (MA is used) | | | ((Delete MA)|| | | | (Stop using shared MA))| | |Tg_NetworkNotification | | | | ---+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- Figure 4 A.2. State Machine for GIST responding node (Figure 3) ----------- State: IDLE ----------- +Transition | |Condition |Action |State v--+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- 1) |rx_Query&& |tx_Response |Established |(!ConfirmRequired) |Install MRS |Upstream | |IF(NSLPdata) |MRS | | tg_RecvMsg(NSLPdata)| | | to Appl.| | | | 2) |rx_Query&& |tx_Response |Wait |(ConfirmRequired) |start T_No_Confirm |Confirm | |IF(NSLPdata) | | | tg_RecvMsg(NSLPdata)| | | to Appl.| | | | ---+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- ----------- State: WAIT CONFIRM ----------- +Transition | |Condition |Action |State v--+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- 3) |timeout T_No_Confirm | |IDLE | | | Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 23] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 4) |rx_Query&& |tx_Response |Wait |(ConfirmRequired) |start T_No_Confirm |Confirm | |IF(NSLPdata) | | | tg_RecvMsg(NSLPdata)| | | to Appl.| | | | 5) |rx_Confirm |Install Upstream MRS |Established | | |Upstream | | |MRS | | | 6) |rx_Data |tx_Error(No_MRS_ |Wait | | installed)|Confirm | | | ---+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- ----------- State: Established Upstream MRS ----------- +Transition | |Condition |Action |State v--+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- 5) |rx_Confirm |Install UpstreamPeerInfo |Established | |tx_Data(queued_NSLP_data)|Upstream | | |MRS | | | 7) |(rx_Query)&& |Delete MRS |Wait |(ConfirmRequired) |tx_Response |Confirm | |start T_No_Confirm | | |IF(MA is used) | | | (Delete MA)|| | | | (Stop using shared MA)| | |IF(NSLPdata) | | | tg_RecvMsg(NSLPdata) | | | to Appl.| | | | 8) |(timeout T_Expire_RNode)|Delete MRS |IDLE ||| |tg_NetworkNotification | |(tg_SetStateLifetime(0))|IF(MA is used) | | | (Delete MA)|| | | | (Stop using shared MA)| | | | 9) |tg_SendMsg |IF(!UpstreamPeerInfo) |Established | | Queue NSLP data |Upstream | |ELSE tx_Data |MRS | | | Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 24] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 10)|rx_Query |IF (NewPeer) |Established | | Update UpstreamPeerInfo|Upstream | |tx_Response |MRS | |restart T_Expire_RNode | | | | 11)|rx_Query(MAinfo)&& |Delete UpstreamPeerInfo |Established |(!ConfirmRequired) |restart T_Expire_RNode |Upstream | |tx_Response(MAinfo) |MRS | | | 12)|rx_Data |IF(UpstreamPeerInfo) |Established | | (tg_RecvMsg to Appl.)|Upstream | | &&(restart_T_Expire_ |MRS | | RNode)| | |ELSE | | | tx_Error(No_MRS_ | | | installed)| | | | 13)|Tg_ERROR |(Delete MRS) |IDLE | |IF (MA is used) | | | ((Delete MA)|| | | | (Stop using shared MA))| | |Tg_NetworkNotification | | | | ---+------------------------+-------------------------+----------- Figure 5 Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 25] Internet-Draft GIST State Machine February 2010 Authors' Addresses Tseno Tsenov Sofia, Bulgaria Email: tseno.tsenov@mytum.de Hannes Tschofenig Nokia Siemens Networks Linnoitustie 6 Espoo 02600 Finland Email: Hannes.Tschofenig@nsn.com Xiaoming Fu University of Goettingen Computer Networks Group Goldschmidtstr. 7 Goettingen 37077 Germany Email: fu@cs.uni-goettingen.de Cedric Aoun Paris, France Email: cedric@caoun.net Elwyn B. Davies Folly Consulting Soham, Cambs, UK Phone: +44 7889 488 335 Email: elwynd@dial.pipex.com Tsenov, et al. Expires August 10, 2010 [Page 26]