idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-ion-scsp-atmarp-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Cannot find the required boilerplate sections (Copyright, IPR, etc.) in this document. Expected boilerplate is as follows today (2024-04-18) according to https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info : IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.a: This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 2: Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 3: This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://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. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Missing expiration date. The document expiration date should appear on the first and last page. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about Internet-Drafts being working documents. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about 6 months document validity -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of current Internet-Drafts. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of Shadow Directories. == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 5 longer pages, the longest (page 2) being 59 lines Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section. ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** The document seems to lack separate sections for Informative/Normative References. All references will be assumed normative when checking for downward references. ** There are 5 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 4 characters in excess of 72. ** The abstract seems to contain references ([2], [1]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. ** The document seems to lack a both a reference to RFC 2119 and the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords. RFC 2119 keyword, line 45: '...S). Since, there MAY be multiple ATMAR...' RFC 2119 keyword, line 46: '...y ATMARP server within the LIS MUST be...' RFC 2119 keyword, line 48: '...n the LIS, there MUST be a method by w...' RFC 2119 keyword, line 52: '...s, and thus SCSP MAY be applied to the...' Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (May 1999) is 9105 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 1700 (ref. '3') (Obsoleted by RFC 3232) Summary: 13 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Internetworking Over NBMA James V. Luciani 3 INTERNET-DRAFT (Bay Networks) 4 Joel Halpern 5 (Newbridge Networks, Inc) 6 Barbara A. Fox 7 (Lucent Technologies) 8 Expires May 1999 10 A Distributed ATMARP Service Using SCSP 12 Status of this Memo 14 This document is an Internet-Draft. Internet-Drafts are working 15 documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, 16 and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute 17 working documents as Internet-Drafts. 19 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 20 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 21 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 22 material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.'' 24 To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the 25 ``1id-abstracts.txt'' listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow 26 Directories on ftp.is.co.za (Africa), ftp.nordu.net (Northern 27 Europe), ftp.nis.garr.it (Southern Europe), munnari.oz.au (Pacific 28 Rim), ftp.ietf.org (US East Coast), or ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast). 30 Abstract 32 This document describes a method for distributing an ATMARP service 33 within a LIS[1]. This method uses the Server Cache Synchronization 34 Protocol (SCSP)[2] to synchronize the ATMARP server databases within 35 a LIS. When SCSP is used to synchronize the caches of ATMARP servers 36 in a LIS, the LIS defines the boundary of an SCSP Server Group (SG). 38 1. Introduction 40 An ATMARP Client implicitly registers (e.g., by sending an ATMARP 41 Request for itself; see [1]) and refreshes its own ATMARP information 42 with a single ATMARP server in its atm$arp-req-list table. In 43 addition, the ATMARP Client uses the ATMARP service to gain access to 44 and re-validate ATMARP information about other ATMARP Clients in its 45 Logical IP Subnet (LIS). Since, there MAY be multiple ATMARP servers 46 in a given LIS, and since any ATMARP server within the LIS MUST be 47 able to reply to ATMARP requests for ATMARP information about any 48 ATMARP Clients within the LIS, there MUST be a method by which to 49 synchronize ATMARP information across all ATMARP Servers within the 50 LIS. The Server Cache Synchronization Protocol (SCSP) solves the 51 generalized server synchronization/cache-replication problem for 52 distributed databases, and thus SCSP MAY be applied to the ATMARP 53 server database synchronization problem with the LIS. When SCSP is 54 used to synchronize the caches of ATMARP servers in a LIS, the LIS 55 defines the boundary of an SCSP Server Group (SG). 57 SCSP is defined in two parts: the protocol independent part and the 58 client/server protocol specific part. The protocol independent part 59 is specified in [2] whereas this document will specify the 60 client/server protocol specific part where ATMARP is the 61 client/server protocol. 63 2. Overview 65 All ATMARP servers belonging to a Logical IP Subnet (LIS)[1] are said 66 to belong to a Server Group (SG). An SG is identified by, not 67 surprisingly, its SGID which is contained in a field in all SCSP 68 packets. All SCSP packets contain a Protocol ID (PID) field as well. 69 This PID field is set to 0x0001 to signify that SCSP is synchronizing 70 ATMARP server databases as opposed to synchronizing some other 71 protocol's databases (see Section B.2.0.1 of [2] for more details). 72 In general, PIDs for SCSP will be assigned by IANA upon request given 73 that a client/server protocol specific specification has been 74 written. In the case of ATMARP, the client/server protocol specific 75 specification was initially written at the same time as SCSP, and 76 thus a PID=0x0001 was assigned by the author. 78 SCSP places no topological requirements upon an ATMARP SG. 79 Obviously, however, the resultant graph of ATMARP servers must span 80 the set of ATMARP servers to be synchronized. For more information 81 about the client/server protocol independent part of SCSP, the reader 82 is encouraged to see [2]. 84 When an ATMARP SG is using SCSP for synchronization, a given ATMARP 85 Client will use only one ATMARP server and it will use that server 86 for remainder of its participation in the SG. This server is said to 87 be the "serving ATMARP server." There needs to be some hysteresis on 88 refreshes since every ATMARP Request may cause a cache update/refresh 89 in the serving ATMARP Server, and such refreshes might cause 90 excessive traffic if propagated to all ATMARP Servers in the SG. In 91 the case of mere refreshes, where no change occurs to the ATMARP 92 Server's cache entry for the ATMARP Client, SCSP updates will occur 93 at a maximum rate of once every 10+Random(2) minutes. 95 When an ATMARP server receives database information via SCSP, it 96 checks it against the locally registered clients. Information not 97 related to locally registered clients is simply accepted. (Note to 98 implementors: this may result in transient multiple possible 99 resolutions for an IP->ATM address binding. The server may provide 100 any one of these bindings to a client who sends in an ATMARP 101 request.) If there is a collision with the locally registered client 102 base, then the base must be checked for whether the information is 103 associated with a connected client. If it is not, then the local 104 information is presumed to be supersceded and must be purged and 105 transmitted to peer ATMARP servers with 0 lifetime. 107 If the local information is associated with a connected client, then 108 an effort needs to be made to determine if the remote information is 109 also associated with a connected client. Therefore: 111 1) The ATMARP server will wait an interval T1 before taking any action. 112 If the duplicative information is purged, no further action is 113 necessary. 114 2) If the duplicate information is not purged, the ATMARP Server will 115 then consider both sets of information (local and remote) to be 116 invalid. A Network Management notification is generated. 117 3) The ATMARP Server will disconnect the local client. An ARPNAK should 118 be sent to the client prior to disconnecting the VC. After waiting 119 an interval T2, the ATMARP Server will purge the locally generated 120 information from the system. (This avoids the potential for one of 121 the two clients to randomly remain in the system when both are wrong.) 123 When an ATMARP server receives a registration from a client, it 124 checks the database of known clients. If there is a known local 125 collision, the procedures from Classic II are followed. If there is 126 a collision with an entry in the remote database, then the 127 registration is accepted and flooded out, and the timer from (1) 128 above is started so as to resolve the apparent collision. 130 3. Format of the CSA Record ATMARP Specific Part 132 CSA Records in SCSP contain a "Client/Server Protocol Specific Part" 133 which contains the non-protocol independent information for a given 134 server's cache entry. 136 0 1 2 3 137 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 138 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 139 | Hardware Type | Protocol Type | 140 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 141 | Lifetime | ATM Addr T/L |ATM SubAddr T/L| Proto Addr Len| 142 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 143 | ATM Address (variable length) | 144 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 145 | ATM SubAddress (variable length) | 146 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 147 | Protocol Address (variable length) | 148 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 150 With the exception of the State and unused fields, these fields 151 contain the values specified in the ATMARP Request and Reply packets 152 defined in [1] which are used to create, update, and access ATMARP 153 server cache entries. 155 Hardware Type 156 Defines the type of "link layer" addresses being carried. This 157 value is the ATM Forum 'address family number' specified in [3] as 158 19 decimal (0x0013). This is the ar$hrd field defined in [1]. 160 Protocol Type 161 This field is the protocol type number for the protocol using 162 ATMARP from [3]. (IP is 0x0800). This is the ar$pro field from 163 [1]. 165 Lifetime 166 This field contains a value (in minutes) which represents the 167 lifetime of the ATMARP entry. A value of 0 indicates that the 168 entry should be deleted. 170 Note that a time-out of a cache entry does not cause a CSA Record 171 to be sent because, if everything is working properly then all 172 ATMARP servers have the cache entry timing out at the same time. 173 Thus, the individual servers would take the appropriate actions 174 necessary. 176 ATM Addr T/L 177 This field contains the type and length of the ATM Address field. 178 The type and length encodings are described in Section 8.7.3 of 179 [1]. 181 ATM SubAddr T/L 182 This field contains the type and length of the ATM SubAddress 183 field. The type and length encodings are described in Section 184 8.7.3 of [1]. 186 Proto Addr Len 187 This field contains the length of the Protocol Address field. For 188 IPv4, the value is 4. 190 ATM Address 191 This is the ATM address of an address binding in an ATMARP server 192 cache entry. The address, if specified, is E.164 or ATM Forum 193 NSAPA. 195 ATM Subaddress 196 This is the ATM subaddress of an address binding in an ATMARP 197 server cache entry. The subaddress, if specified, is an ATM Forum 198 NSAPA. If null, no storage will be allocated. 200 Protocol Address 201 This is the internetwork address of an address binding in an ATMARP 202 server cache entry. 204 4. Values for SCSP Protocol Independent Part 206 The following sections give values for fields of the SCSP Protocol 207 Independent Part of the various SCSP messages. 209 4.1 Values for the SCSP "Mandatory Common Part" 211 Protocol ID = 0x0001 212 Sender ID Len = 0x04 213 Recvr ID Len = 0x04 215 See Section B.2.0.1 of [2] for a detailed description of these 216 fields. 218 4.2 Values for the SCSP "CSAS Record" 220 Cache Key Len = 0x04 221 Orig ID Len = 0x04 223 See Section B.2.0.2 of [2] for a detailed description of these 224 fields. 226 References 228 [1] "Classical IP and ARP over ATM", Mark Laubach and Joel Halpern, 229 RFC 2225. 231 [2] "Server Cache Synchronization Protocol (SCSP)", Luciani, 232 Armitage, Halpern, RFC 2334. 234 [3] Assigned Numbers, J. Reynolds and J. Postel, RFC 1700. 236 Acknowledgments 237 We would like to thank the members of the ION working group of the 238 IETF, whose review and discussion of this document has been 239 invaluable. 241 Author's Address 243 James V. Luciani 244 Bay Networks, Inc. 245 3 Federal Street, BL3-04 246 Billerica, MA 01821 247 phone: +1-508-916-4734 248 email: luciani@baynetworks.com 250 Joel Halpern 251 Newbridge Networks, Inc 252 593 Herndon Parkway 253 Herndon, VA 22070-5241 254 phone: +1-703-736-5954 255 email: jhalpern@Newbridge.com 257 Barbara A. Fox 258 Lucent Technologies 259 300 Baker Ave, Suite 100 260 Concord, MA 01742-2168 261 phone: +1-978-287-2843 262 email: barbarafox@lucent.com