summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc2549.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc2549.txt')
-rw-r--r--doc/rfc/rfc2549.txt339
1 files changed, 339 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc2549.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc2549.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..83943c6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc2549.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,339 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group D. Waitzman
+Request for Comments: 2549 IronBridge Networks
+Updates: 1149 1 April 1999
+Category: Experimental
+
+
+ IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service
+
+Status of this Memo
+
+ This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet
+ community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind.
+ Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested.
+ Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+ Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
+
+Abstract
+
+ This memo amends RFC 1149, "A Standard for the Transmission of IP
+ Datagrams on Avian Carriers", with Quality of Service information.
+ This is an experimental, not recommended standard.
+
+Overview and Rational
+
+ The following quality of service levels are available: Concorde,
+ First, Business, and Coach. Concorde class offers expedited data
+ delivery. One major benefit to using Avian Carriers is that this is
+ the only networking technology that earns frequent flyer miles, plus
+ the Concorde and First classes of service earn 50% bonus miles per
+ packet. Ostriches are an alternate carrier that have much greater
+ bulk transfer capability but provide slower delivery, and require the
+ use of bridges between domains.
+
+ The service level is indicated on a per-carrier basis by bar-code
+ markings on the wing. One implementation strategy is for a bar-code
+ reader to scan each carrier as it enters the router and then enqueue
+ it in the proper queue, gated to prevent exit until the proper time.
+ The carriers may sleep while enqueued.
+
+ For secure networks, carriers may have classes Prime or Choice.
+ Prime carriers are self-keying when using public key encryption.
+ Some distributors have been known to falsely classify Choice carriers
+ as Prime.
+
+ Packets MAY be marked for deletion using RED paint while enqueued.
+
+
+
+Waitzman Experimental [Page 1]
+
+RFC 2549 IP over Avian Carriers with QoS 1 April 1999
+
+
+ Weighted fair queueing (WFQ) MAY be implemented using scales, as
+ shown:
+
+ __
+ _____/-----\ / o\
+ <____ _____\_/ >--
+ +-----+ \ / /______/
+ | 10g | /|:||/
+ +-----+ /____/|
+ | 10g | |
+ +-----+ .. X
+ ===============================
+ ^
+ |
+ =========
+
+ Carriers in the queue too long may leave log entries, as shown on the
+ scale.
+
+ The following is a plot of traffic shaping, from coop-erative host
+ sites.
+
+
+ Alt | Plot of Traffic Shaping showing carriers in flight
+ |
+ 2k | ....................
+ | . .
+ | . .
+ 1k | . .
+ | +---+ +---+
+ | | A | | B |
+ | +---+ +---+
+ |_____________________________________________
+
+
+ Avian carriers normally bypass bridges and tunnels but will seek out
+ worm hole tunnels. When carrying web traffic, the carriers may
+ digest the spiders, leaving behind a more compact representation.
+ The carriers may be confused by mirrors.
+
+ Round-robin queueing is not recommended. Robins make for well-tuned
+ networks but do not support the necessary auto-homing feature.
+
+ A BOF was held at the last IETF but only Avian Carriers were allowed
+ entry, so we don't know the results other than we're sure they think
+ MPLS is great. Our attempts at attaching labels to the carriers have
+ been met with resistance.
+
+
+
+
+Waitzman Experimental [Page 2]
+
+RFC 2549 IP over Avian Carriers with QoS 1 April 1999
+
+
+ NATs are not recommended either -- as with many protocols, modifying
+ the brain-embedded IP addresses is difficult, plus Avian Carriers MAY
+ eat the NATs.
+
+ Encapsulation may be done with saran wrappers. Unintentional
+ encapsulation in hawks has been known to occur, with decapsulation
+ being messy and the packets mangled.
+
+ Loose source routes are a viable evolutionary alternative enhanced
+ standards-based MSWindows-compliant technology, but strict source
+ routes MUST NOT be used, as they are a choke-point.
+
+ The ITU has offered the IETF formal alignment with its corresponding
+ technology, Penguins, but that won't fly.
+
+ Multicasting is supported, but requires the implementation of a clone
+ device. Carriers may be lost if they are based on a tree as it is
+ being pruned. The carriers propagate via an inheritance tree. The
+ carriers have an average TTL of 15 years, so their use in expanding
+ ring searches is limited.
+
+ Additional quality of service discussion can be found in a Michelin's
+ guide.
+
+MIB and Management issues
+
+ AvCarrier2 OBJECT-TYPE
+ SYNTAX SEQUENCE OF DNA
+ MAX-ACCESS can't-read
+ STATUS living
+ DESCRIPTION "Definition of an avian carrier"
+ ::= { life eukaryotes mitochondrial_eukaryotes crown_eukaryotes
+ metazoa chordata craniata vertebrata gnathostomata
+ sarcopterygii terrestrial_vertebrates amniota diapsida
+ archosauromorpha archosauria dinosauria aves neornithes
+ columbiformes columbidae columba livia }
+
+ AvCarrier OBJECT-TYPE
+ SYNTAX SET OF Cells
+ MAX-ACCESS not-accessible
+ STATUS obsolete
+ DESCRIPTION "Definition of an avian carrier"
+ ::= { life animalia chordata vertebrata aves
+ columbiformes columbidae columba livia }
+
+ PulseRate OBJECT-TYPE
+ SYNTAX Gauge(0..300)
+ MAX-ACCESS read-only
+
+
+
+Waitzman Experimental [Page 3]
+
+RFC 2549 IP over Avian Carriers with QoS 1 April 1999
+
+
+ STATUS current
+ DESCRIPTION "Pulse rate of carrier, as measured in neck.
+ Frequent sampling is disruptive to operations."
+ ::= { AvCarrier 1}
+
+ The carriers will not line up in lexigraphic order but will
+ naturally order in a large V shape. Bulk retrieval is possible
+ using the Powerful Get-Net operator.
+
+Specification of Requirements
+
+ In this document, several words are used to signify the requirements
+ of the specification. These words are often capitalized.
+
+ MUST Usually.
+
+ MUST NOT Usually not.
+
+ SHOULD Only when Marketing insists.
+
+ MAY Only if it doesn't cost extra.
+
+Security Considerations
+
+ There are privacy issues with stool pigeons.
+
+ Agoraphobic carriers are very insecure in operation.
+
+Patent Considerations
+
+ There is ongoing litigation about which is the prior art: carrier or
+ egg.
+
+References
+
+ Waitzman, D., "A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on
+ Avian Carriers", RFC 1149, 1 April 1990.
+
+ACKnowledgments
+
+ Jim.Carlson.Ibnets.com > Jon.Saperia . ack 32 win 123 (DF)
+ Ross Callon, Scott Bradner, Charlie Lynn ...
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Waitzman Experimental [Page 4]
+
+RFC 2549 IP over Avian Carriers with QoS 1 April 1999
+
+
+Author's Address
+
+ David Waitzman
+ IronBridge Networks
+ 55 Hayden Ave
+ Lexington, MA 02421
+ Phone: (781) 372-8161
+
+ EMail: djw@vineyard.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Waitzman Experimental [Page 5]
+
+RFC 2549 IP over Avian Carriers with QoS 1 April 1999
+
+
+Full Copyright Statement
+
+ Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
+
+ This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
+ others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
+ or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
+ and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
+ kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
+ included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
+ document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
+ the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
+ Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
+ developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
+ copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
+ followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
+ English.
+
+ The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
+ revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
+
+ This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
+ "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
+ TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
+ BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
+ HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
+ MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Waitzman Experimental [Page 6]
+