diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc1291.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc1291.txt | 563 |
1 files changed, 563 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc1291.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc1291.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..f6fa53e --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc1291.txt @@ -0,0 +1,563 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group V. Aggarwal +Request for Comments: 1291 JvNCnet Computer Network + December 1991 + + + Mid-Level Networks + Potential Technical Services + +Status of this Memo + + This RFC provides information for the Internet community. It does not + specify an Internet standard. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. + +Abstract + + This document proposes a set of technical services that each Internet + mid-level network can offer within the mid-level network itself and + and to its peer networks. The term "mid-level" is used as a generic + term to represent all regional and similar networks, which, due to + continuous evolutions and transitions, can no longer be termed + "regional" [MAN]. It discusses the pros and cons of offering these + services, as well as areas in which mid-level networks can work + together. + + A large portion of the ideas stem from discussions at the IETF + Operational Statistics (OPstat), User Connectivity Problems (UCP) and + Network Joint Management (NJM) working groups. + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction.................................................. 2 + 2. The Generic Model............................................. 2 + 3. Technical Services............................................ 3 + 3.1 Domain Name Service......................................... 3 + 3.2 Public Domain Software...................................... 4 + 3.3 Network Time................................................ 5 + 3.4 Network News................................................ 5 + 3.5 Mailing Lists............................................... 6 + 4. Experimental Testbeds......................................... 6 + 5. Network Information Services.................................. 7 + 6. Network Operations............................................ 7 + 7. References.................................................... 8 + 8. Security Considerations....................................... 9 + 9. Author's Address.............................................. 9 + Appendix A Mailing Lists......................................... 10 + Appendix B DNS Architecture Strategy............................. 10 + + + + + +Aggarwal [Page 1] + +RFC 1291 Potential Technical Services December 1991 + + +1. Introduction + + Over the past few years, the Internet has grown to be a very large + entity and its dependability is critical to its users. Furthermore, + due to the size and nature of the network, the trend has been to + decentralize as many network functions (such as domain name-service, + whois, etc.) as possible. Efforts are being made in resource + discovery [SHHH90] so that the work of researchers is not lost in the + volumes of data that is available on the Internet. + + A side result of this growth has been the logical structure imposed + in the Internet of networks classified by function. Tangible examples + in the present state are the NSFnet national backbone, the mid- + level/regional networks and campus networks. Each of these can be + viewed as hierarchies within an organization, each serving a slightly + different function than the other (campus LANs providing access to + local resources, mid-level networks providing access to remote + resources, etc.). The functions of each hierarchy then become the + "services" offered to the organizational layer below it, who in turn + depend on these services. + + This document proposes a set of basic technical services that could + be offered by a mid-level network. These services would not only + increase the robustness of the mid-level network itself, but would + also serve to structure the distribution of resources and services + within the Internet. It also proposes a uniform naming convention for + locating the hosts offering these services. + +2. The Generic Model + + The Internet model that is used as the basis for this document is a + graph of mid-level networks connected to one another, each in turn + connecting the campus/organization networks and with the end users + attached to the campus networks. The model assumes that the mid-level + networks constitute the highest level of functional division within + the Internet hierarchy described above (this could change in the + unforeseen future). With this model in perspective, this document + addresses the objectives of minimizing unnecessary traffic within the + Internet as well as making the entire structure as robust as + possible. + + The proposed structure is a derived extension of organizational LANs + where certain services are offered within the organizational LAN + itself, such as nameservice, mail, shared files, single or + hierarchical points of contact for problems, etc. + + The following are the services that are discussed as possible + functions of a mid-level network: + + + +Aggarwal [Page 2] + +RFC 1291 Potential Technical Services December 1991 + + + o Technical services + + o Experimental sites for testing and dissemination of new + software and technology to end sites on the network + + In addition, the following services are mentioned briefly which are + discussed in detail elsewhere [SSM91, ML91]: + + o Network Operation services and the interaction between + different mid-level networks in this area + + o Network Information services + +3. Technical Services + + The Internet has grown to be an essential entity because of the + services that it offers to its end users. The list of services is + long and growing, but some services are more widely used and deployed + than others. This section attempts to list and discuss those + technical services that could help a mid-level network provide robust + and improved services to its end sites. + +3.1 Domain Name Service + + According to the NSFnet traffic statistics collected for May 1991, + about 7% of the packets on the NSFnet backbone were domain nameserver + (DNS) packets. This is a significant amount of traffic, and since + most of the other network applications depend on this service, a + robust DNS service is critical to any Internet site. + + Proper location of secondary nameservers so that they are located on + different physical networks can increase the reliability of this + service to a large extent [MOC87a, MOC87b]. However, the nature of + the service requires that the nameservers for the next highest level + be available in order to resolve names outline-mode side of one's + domain. Thus, for "foo.princeton.edu" to resolve "a.mid.net", the + root nameservers which point to mid.net's nameservers have to be + reachable. + + To make the service more reliable, the mid-level network could have + at least one nameserver that is able to resolve nameserver queries + for all domains directly connected to it. Thus, in the event that the + entire mid-level network becomes isolated from the rest of the + Internet, applications can still resolve queries for sites directly + connected to the mid-level network. Without this functionality, there + is no way of resolving a name if the root (or higher level) + nameservers become unreachable, even if the query is for a site that + is directly connected and reachable. + + + +Aggarwal [Page 3] + +RFC 1291 Potential Technical Services December 1991 + + + Strategies for implementing this architecture are discussed in + appendix B. + + To locate such a "meta-domain" server within a mid-level network, it + is proposed that a nameserver entry for "meta-dns" exist within the + mid-level network's domain. + +3.2 Public Domain Software + + File transfer traffic constituted 23% of the NSFnet backbone traffic + for May 1991. Public shareware is a very valuable resource within the + Internet and a considerable amount of effort is being put into + developing applications to track all available resources in the + public archives [SHHH90]. + + It would be difficult, if not impossible to create an up-to-date + repository for every public domain package available on the Internet, + simply because of the volume of software and the rate at which new + software is being developed every day. Some hosts have gained + popularity as good public archives (such as uunet.uu.net, sumex- + aim.stanford.edu, wuarchive.wustl.edu) and new developers tend to + distribute the software to these sites as distribution points. The + economics of maintaining centralized archives is another deterrent to + centralization (the UUnet archives at uunet.uu.net take up roughly + 1GB of disk storage). + + Recently however, a number of methods for resource discovery have + been developed and are available on the Internet ("ftp-list" file + compiled by John Granose - odin@pilot.njin.net, Archie at + archie.cs.mcgill.ca and Prospero [NEU]). + + It is desirable that the mid-level networks be able to provide up- + to-date pointers to the distribution hosts for available public + software archives. Coordinating the distribution of a static list is + difficult (though not impossible) and the use of automated resource + discovery mechanisms such as Archie and Prospero is recommended. + Under ideal conditions, any software that is popular and significant + (e.g., X11, TeX, RFC's) could be archived and distributed within the + mid-level network, but measuring "popularity" and "significance" are + debatable and left for further evaluation. Furthermore, a nameserver + entry for host "swdist" within the domain can provide information on + the various available alternatives for software distribution and + discovery (static file location, pointers to Archie servers, etc.) -- + this nameserver entry can be an alias for a CNAME or a TXT entry. + + + + + + + +Aggarwal [Page 4] + +RFC 1291 Potential Technical Services December 1991 + + +3.3 Network Time + + An important feature of any computer network providing distributed + services is the capability to synchronize the local clocks on the + various systems in the network. Ideally, the clocks of all the + reference sources would be synchronized to national standards by wire + or radio. The importance and immense popularity of this service makes + Network Time a very useful potential service that can be provided by + a mid-level network. No specific protocol for maintaining time is + proposed, and any available protocol that maintains time with + reasonable accuracy could be used. + + Network Time Protocol (NTP) traffic constituted 1% of the NSFnet + traffic during May 1991. The traffic might seem insignificant, but + there have been instances where a particular stratum-1 timeserver + (e.g., one of the stratum-1 servers at University of Delaware) has + reached a point of overload with too many different sites trying to + peer with it. + + It is proposed that at least one stratum-1 and two stratum-2 servers + be located within a mid-level network (the selection of three servers + is based on the NTP standards documentation [MIL89]). Note that the + servers can be located at any of the directly connected sites in the + network as long as they are publicly accessible. All sites connected + to the mid-level network can then coordinate their system times with + the servers within the mid-level network itself. Besides increasing + the reliability of the timekeeping network, this approach would also + limit the load on each timeserver. + + For locating the network time servers within a domain, nameserver + entries for "timekeeper-x" (where x= 1,2,3..) can be made within the + domain. The servers are numbered in order of preference and accuracy. + Thus, "timekeeper-1.foo.net" would be the primary timekeeper and + "timekeeper-2.foo.net" would be additional (possibly secondary) + timekeepers within domain "foo.net". If such hosts are not available + within a domain, a TXT entry pointing to other recommended time- + servers could be provided instead. + +3.4 Network News + + Network News (or Usenet News) constituted 14% of the NSFnet traffic + in May 1991. Netnews is an expensive service, both in terms of disk + and CPU power, as well as network bandwidth consumed. + + The present structure of Network News consists of several hub sites + which are distributed over the Internet. End sites get news feeds + from other sites, and an article gets injected into the news stream + by sending it to the nearest "upstream" site, which then forwards it + + + +Aggarwal [Page 5] + +RFC 1291 Potential Technical Services December 1991 + + + to its connected news sites, and so on. There is no preset norm for + finding a site willing to provide a news feed, and it usually ends up + being a site with whom the site administrator happens to be + acquainted. However, this could easily result in some sites not being + able to get an economical news feed from within the mid-level network + and actually having to derive the feed from a site located on another + mid-level network. + + A mid-level network could alleviate such occurrences by being able to + provide a newsfeed to any or all of its directly connected end sites. + Though an expensive resource, some of the costs can be moderated by + acting as a transit news feeder so that the news needn't be stored + for a long time on disk. The software for providing the news feed is + not specific and depends entirely on the newsfeed provider. + +3.5 Mailing Lists + + Internet mailing lists are another popular source of information in + parallel to Network News. However, like public software, there is no + central repository of all the possible mailing lists available on the + Internet, and it would require considerable effort to compile one (at + the time of writing this document, a fairly comprehensive list is + available on the Internet and mentioned in appendix A. + + At this time, there is no clear strategy for distributing or + maintaining mailing lists. However, it can be very expensive for a + site to distribute mail to all individual end users directly, and if + a clear strategy for maintaining a list of mailing-lists can be + devised, then mail exploders can be set up at the mid-level networks, + each of which forwards the mail to exploders at the end sites. This + mechanism would reduce the load on the originating systems, and + provides a clean path for tracking down mailer problems. Also, in + order to prevent bounced mail from propagating back to the originator + of the message, the mailing lists should be set up in a way so that + bounced mail goes to the the "owner" of the list and not to the + originator of the mail message. + + A list of major mailing lists for the services discussed in this + document are listed in appendix A. + +4. Experimental Testbeds + + Due to the working relationships that they have with their end sites + and peer networks, the mid-level networks are very good media for + distribution of new ideas and technology. Examples of this function + are the White Pages pilot project [RS90] established by NYSERnet, the + NSAP routing schema for OSI transitioning [CGC91], etc. + + + + +Aggarwal [Page 6] + +RFC 1291 Potential Technical Services December 1991 + + + The mid-level networks could establish cooperative experimental + testbeds for testing and deployment of new technologies similar to + the ones mentioned above. Besides deployment and testing of new + technology, this could also serve to provide a "help" service to the + end-sites and to get them started with the new software. + + The exact interaction between the mid-level networks in this area is + not very clear. It is complicated by competition for members between + the mid-level networks and needs to be discussed further. + +5. Network Information Services + + There are a variety of new and useful user services available on the + Internet that are difficult to document and provide a comprehensive + list of. Some attempt has been made at documenting such resources + [NNS] and a mid-level network can be the initial point of contact for + distribution of such information on a wide basis. The information can + be disseminated in a more controlled and complete manner using this + hierarchical approach if each mid-level network maintains up-to-date + information about its directly connected sites. Network Information + services (NIC) also make the network easier and more attractive to + end users. Examples of these services are: + + o provide information resources + + - security advisory messages + + - list of library catalogs [GL91] + + - geographical information servers + + - password generators + + o resolve end user problems (user support) + + These services are NIC related and discussed in detail elsewhere + [SSM91]. For accessibility information, an entry for "nic" could + exist in the DNS for the domain (this could be a TXT entry listing + email or phone number information for users or other NIC's). + +6. Network Operations + + The Network Operation Center's (NOC's) at the mid-level networks need + to cooperate with each other to resolve network problems. In the + event of a network problem between two mid-level networks or if an + end-site has trouble getting to any host, the mid-level network NOCs + can serve to be the initial point of contact. The procedures for + interaction among NOCs and the formats for exchange of trouble- + + + +Aggarwal [Page 7] + +RFC 1291 Potential Technical Services December 1991 + + + tickets between the NOCs are described elsewhere [JOH91, ML91]. + + It is important for cooperating NOCs to have contact information for + their directly connected campus/organizational sites and also about + their peer mid-level networks. A distributed mechanism for + maintaining contact information could be implemented by using a + nameserver TXT entry for "noc" or by maintaining "finger" information + for user "noc@domain" or "noc@noc.domain". A NOC "phonebook" listing + the contact information for the various NOCs can be used as a static + non-distributed mechanism (it is understood that the phonebook can + contain outdated information, but the distributed mechanisms can + provide correct and updated NOC information provided that the hosts + are reachable at the desired time). If it is undesirable to publish + the phone number or email address of the NOC for any reason, an entry + saying "unpublished" (or words to that effect) could exist in the + nameserver or "finger" entry instead. + +7. References + + [BOG] Dunlap, K., and M. Karels, "Nameserver Operations Guide + for Bind Release 4.8", CSRG, Department of Electrical + Engineering and Computer Sciences, University of + California, Berkeley, California. + + [CCI88] CCITT Blue Book, "X.500 Series Recommendations", ITU, + 1989. + + [CGC91] Collela, R., Gardner, E., and R. Callon, "Guidelines for + OSI NSAP Allocation in the Internet'', RFC 1237, + NIST, Mitre, DEC, July 1991. + + [SSM91] Sitzler, D., Smith, P., and A. Marine, "Building a Network + Information Services Infrastructure", RFC in + preparation. + + [GL91] George, A., and R. Larsen, "Internet Accessible Library + Catalogs & Databases", Aug 1991. + Available via anonymous FTP from ariel.unm.edu. + + [JOH91] Johnson, D., "NOC TT Requirements", RFC in + preparation. + + [MAN] Mandelbaum, R., and P. Mandelbaum, "The Strategic Future + of the Mid-Level Networks", University of Rochester, + NY, 1991. + + [MOC87a] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Implementation and + Specification", RFC 1035, USC Information Sciences + + + +Aggarwal [Page 8] + +RFC 1291 Potential Technical Services December 1991 + + + Institute, November 1987. + + [MOC87b] Mockapetris, P., "Domain Names - Concepts and + Facilities", RFC 1034, USC Information Sciences + Institute, November 1987. + + [MIL89] Mills, D., "Network Time Protocol", RFC 1129, UDel, + October 1989. + + [ML91] Mathis, M., and D. Long, "User Connectivity Problems + Working Group", RFC in preparation. + + [NEU] Neuman, B., "The Virtual System Model: A Scalable + Approach to Organizing Large Systems", Department of + Computer Science, University of Washington, FR-35, + Seattle, WA, May 1990. + + [NNS] NSF Network Service Center, "Internet Resource Guide", + Cambridge, MA. + Available via anonymous FTP from nnsc.nsf.net. + + [RS90] Rose, M., and M. Schoffstall, "The NYSERnet White Pages + Pilot Project", NYSERnet, Inc., Mar 1990. + + [SHHH90] Schwartz, M., Hardy, D., Heinzman, W., and G. + Hirschowitz, "Supporting Resource Discovery Among + Public Internet Archives", Department of Computer + Science, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO., + September 1990. + +8. Security Considerations + + Security issues are not discussed in this memo. + +9. Author's Address + + Vikas Aggarwal + JvNCnet + 6 von Neumann Hall + Princeton University + Princeton, NJ 08544 + + Phone: +1-609-258-2403 + Email: vikas@jvnc.net + + + + + + + +Aggarwal [Page 9] + +RFC 1291 Potential Technical Services December 1991 + + +Appendix A - Mailing Lists + + The following is a list of popular mailing lists for the services + listed in this document. To subscribe to a particular mailing list, + send a request to "mailing-list-request" (do not send a request to + the entire mailing list). + + o ietf@isi.edu: The general mailing list for the Internet + Engineering Task Force. This group is concerned with the evolution + and development of Internet related protocols and standards. Old + mail is archived at "venera.isi.edu" in directory ftp/irg/ietf. + + o ntp@trantor.umd.edu: For discussions on the Network Time + Protocol (NTP). + + o namedroppers@nic.ddn.mil: Mailing list for discussions on DNS + topics. Old mail is archived at "nic.ddn.mil". + + At the time of writing this document, a list of mailing lists on the + Internet is available via anonymous FTP from host "ftp.nisc.sri.com" + in the file "netinfo/interest-groups". + +Appendix B - DNS Architecture Strategy + + This section discusses practical strategies for implementing a + nameserver architecture within a mid-level network, so that it can + resolve nameserver queries for all domains directly attached to it. + + In order to resolve queries for all directly connected networks, a + host that is authoritative for all directly attached domains will + need to exist within the mid-level network. Nameservers at the end + sites would then treat this "group-of-domains" nameserver as a + forwarding server to resolve all non-local queries. + + This can be done by adding a line to the named.boot file on the end + site nameservers such as: + + forwarders 128.121.50.7 128.32.0.4 + + This method has the added advantage that the forwarding server builds + up a very rich cache of data [BOG] and acts like a metacache that all + hosts can benefit from. Note that the forwarding server is queried + only if the end-site server cannot service a query locally -- hence + the "meta-domain" server is not overloaded with queries for all + nameserver lookups. + + + + + + +Aggarwal [Page 10] +
\ No newline at end of file |