NSIS Framework Issues - Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)NSIS框架问题，因特网工程任务组（IETF）.pptVIP

下载本文档

2
0
约5.29千字
约 14页
2018-04-16 发布于江西
举报
版权申诉

NSIS Framework Issues - Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)NSIS框架问题，因特网工程任务组（IETF）.ppt

1、原创力文档（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。。
2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。
4、该文档为VIP文档，如果想要下载，成为VIP会员后，下载免费。
5、成为VIP后，下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后，不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
6、成为VIP后，您将拥有八大权益，权益包括：VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传，每下载1次，网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等，对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档

NSIS Framework Issuesdraft-ietf-nsis-fw-02.txt Robert Hancock (ed.), Ilya Freytsis, Georgios Karagiannis, John Loughney, Sven van den Bosch IETF#56 – San Francisco March 2003 Overview Status The five open technical points What happens next Current Status: Technical draft-ietf-nsis-fw-02.txt (now) Major update and restructuring since –01 version Technical points to note Layer split decisions have made NTLP thinner Sender/receiver aspects, resource management, authorisation aspects shifted ‘upwards’ NTLP is ‘single-hop-scope’ (with careful definition) Addressing mode and any internal NTLP layering are design decisions Minimal flow id (not full packet classifier) is ‘in’ Based on outer headers only (e.g. CoA not HA for MIP) Limited ambitions for session identification Current Status: Editorial Re-arrangement of sections and content around 2 layer model First sections about layer boundary and NTLP properties Includes section on ‘how we go beyond the RSVP problem space’ (types of NSLP flexibility) Final section on QoS signalling as ‘worked example’ Terminology fixes: flow-id, NTLP…? Maybe it reads better, maybe it doesn’t… Easiest to read it again Issue 1: Transport Traditional transport-layer like behaviour: Congestion avoidance flow control Reliability aspects (e.g. achieving rare message loss) Bundling Segmentation Possible consensus position? None can permanently be ruled out as un-useful The NTLP (or, below NSLP) is the right place for them Some signalling applications/environments won’t need to invoke that protocol support They don’t need the function or it comes for free somehow They can save the ‘cost’ Issue 1: Way Forward Framework should say crudely how this issue is managed In general: flexible support below NSLP Right way to manage ‘optionality’ depends on the function: who it affects, who benefits Example (not a proposal!!!!!!!) Bundling: NTLP can do it if it likes to Low loss likelihood: signalling application can demand, NTLP can decide how to provide i