From 4bfd864f10b68b71482b35c818559068ef8d5797 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Thomas Voss Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 20:54:24 +0100 Subject: doc: Add RFC documents --- doc/rfc/rfc5431.txt | 283 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 283 insertions(+) create mode 100644 doc/rfc/rfc5431.txt (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc5431.txt') diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc5431.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc5431.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..0b66e9e --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc5431.txt @@ -0,0 +1,283 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group D. Sun +Request for Comments: 5431 Alcatel-Lucent +Category: Informational March 2009 + + + Diameter ITU-T Rw Policy Enforcement Interface Application + +Status of This Memo + + This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does + not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this + memo is unlimited. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of + publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). + Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights + and restrictions with respect to this document. + +Abstract + + This document describes the need for a new pair of IANA Diameter + Command Codes to be used in a vendor-specific new application, namely + for the ITU-T Rec. Q.3303.3 - Rw interface used to send a request/ + response for authorizing network Quality of Service (QoS) resources + and policy enforcement in a network element, as one of the + recommendations of the International Telecommunication Union - + Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T). + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction ....................................................2 + 2. Terminology .....................................................2 + 3. Diameter ITU-T Rw Policy Enforcement Interface ..................3 + 4. IANA Considerations .............................................3 + 4.1. Application Identifier .....................................3 + 4.2. Command Codes ..............................................4 + 4.3. AVP Codes ..................................................4 + 5. Security Considerations .........................................4 + 6. Acknowledgements ................................................4 + 7. References ......................................................5 + 7.1. Normative References .......................................5 + 7.2. Informative References .....................................5 + + + +Sun Informational [Page 1] + +RFC 5431 ITU-T Rw Interface March 2009 + + +1. Introduction + + This document summarizes the use of Diameter codes in a newly defined + realization of a specification for authorizing network QoS resources + and policy enforcement [Q.3303.3]. A new pair of Command Codes have + been assigned by IANA. This document summarizes the uses of newly + defined Diameter codes (Command Codes, AVP, vendor-specific + application id). When combined with the Diameter Base protocol, this + application's specification [Q.3303.3] satisfies the requirements of + [Y.2111] of the International Telecommunication Union - + Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) to send a request + and receive a response for controlling the policy enforcement. + + The Diameter realization of this application assumes the use of the + Diameter Base protocol, as per RFC 3588, and extends it only for a + specific application using a vendor-id (ITU-T), a vendor-specific + application ID (16777256), a new Command Code (315), and new + attribute-value pairs (AVPs), which are defined in the vendor- + specific namespace. + + This application is used to authorize network QoS resources and + policy enforcement (including the amount of bandwidth, QoS class, and + traffic flow processing) as an extension of the Diameter application + [RFC4006]. The request is based on the Diameter extensibility + discussions in the DIME WG that led to the conclusion that it is + better to define new Command Codes whenever the ABNF of a command is + modified by adding, removing, or semantically changing a required AVP + in order to avoid interoperability problems. The document is + utilizing authorization and accounting functionality, and the entire + exchange is related to users utilizing applications that require QoS + treatment. This approach is consistent with the practice and + experience gained since the publication of [RFC3588] (see for example + [RFC5224]), which is now under revision by the DIME Working Group who + will provide a revised set of recommendations and procedures for IANA + considerations [DIME]. + +2. Terminology + + In the base Diameter specification [RFC3588], Section 1.4 defines + most of the terminology used in this document. Additionally, the + terms and acronyms defined in Section 3 and Section 4 of [Q.3303.3] + are used in this document. + + + + + + + + + +Sun Informational [Page 2] + +RFC 5431 ITU-T Rw Interface March 2009 + + +3. Diameter ITU-T Rw Policy Enforcement Interface + + The Rw interface is used for information exchange to apply policy + decisions between the Policy Decision Point (PDP, i.e., in the ITU-T + term, Policy Decision Functional Entity (PD-FE)) and the Policy + Enforcement Point (PEP, i.e., in the ITU-T term, Policy Enforcement + Functional Entity (PE-FE)). + + The interface allows the PDP to push the authorized admission + decisions to the PEP. It also allows the PEP to request the + authorization of admission decisions from the PDP when path-coupled + resource reservation mechanisms are in use. The main information + conveyed by the Rw interface is: + + o Resources reservation and/or allocation requests for media flows; + + o QoS handling requests such as packet marking and policing; + + o Gate control (opening/closing) requests for a media flow; + + o NAPT and NAT traversal requests for the necessary address mapping + information; + + o Resource usage information requests and reports for media flows. + + The detailed descriptions of the Diameter Policy Enforcement + interface ITU-T Rw can be found in Section 5 of [Q.3303.3]. + +4. IANA Considerations + + This section provides guidance to the Internet Assigned Numbers + Authority (IANA) regarding registration of values related to the + Diameter protocol, in accordance with BCP 26 [RFC5226]. + + This document defines values in the namespaces that have been created + and defined in [RFC3588]. The IANA Considerations section of that + document details the assignment criteria. Values assigned in this + document, or by future IANA action, must be coordinated within this + shared namespace. + +4.1. Application Identifier + + A vendor-specific application ID (16777256) for the application of + [Q.3303.3] has been assigned by the IANA. + + + + + + + +Sun Informational [Page 3] + +RFC 5431 ITU-T Rw Interface March 2009 + + + Registry: + ID values Name Reference + ---------------------------------------------------------- + 16777256 ITU-T Rw 7.2.1 of ITU-T Q.3303.3 + + +4.2. Command Codes + + IANA has allocated Command Code values for the following commands + defined in Section 7.4 of [Q.3303.3] from the Command Code namespace + defined in [RFC3588]. + + Registry: + Code Value Name Reference + ------------------------------------------------------------------ + 315 Policy-Install-Request(PIR) 7.4.1 of ITU-T Q.3303.3 + 315 Policy-Install-Answer (PIA) 7.4.2 of ITU-T Q.3303.3 + +4.3. AVP Codes + + The values 1010~1018 are assigned by the ITU-T to the following AVPs + within the ITU-T vendor-ID 11502 namespace: PI-Request-Type AVP, PI- + Request-Number AVP, Traffic-Descriptor-UL AVP, Traffic-Descriptor-DL + AVP, Maximum-Burst-Size AVP, Committed-Data-Rate AVP, Committed- + Burst-Size AVP, Excess-Burst-Size, Removal-Cause AVP. + + See Table 1/Q.3303.3 in Section 7.3.1 of [Q.3303.3] for detailed + information on AVP codes, value types, and flag rules. + +5. Security Considerations + + This document describes the Diameter Policy Enforcement Application. + It builds on top of the Diameter Base protocol and the same security + considerations described in [RFC3588] are applicable to this + document. No further extensions are required beyond the security + mechanisms offered by [RFC3588]. + +6. Acknowledgements + + The author would like to thank Dan Romascanu, Hannes Tschofenig, and + Tina Tsou for their help and support. Finally, the author would like + to thank Alcatel-Lucent, as most of the effort put into this document + was done while he was in their employ. + + + + + + + + +Sun Informational [Page 4] + +RFC 5431 ITU-T Rw Interface March 2009 + + +7. References + +7.1. Normative References + + [Q.3303.3] ITU-T Recommendation Q.3303.3, "Resource control protocol + no. 3 (rcp3): Protocol at the Rw interface between the + Policy Decision Physical Entity (PD-PE) and the Policy + Enforcement Physical Entity (PE-PE): Diameter", 2008. + + [RFC3588] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. + Arkko, "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, + September 2003. + +7.2. Informative References + + [DIME] Fajardo, V., Arkko, J., Loughney, J., and G. Zorn, + "Diameter Base Protocol", Work in Progress, + November 2008. + + [RFC4006] Hakala, H., Mattila, L., Koskinen, J-P., Stura, M., and + J. Loughney, "Diameter Credit-Control Application", + RFC 4006, August 2005. + + [RFC5224] Brenner, M., "Diameter Policy Processing Application", + RFC 5224, March 2008. + + [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an + IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, + May 2008. + + [Y.2111] ITU-T Recommedation Y.2111, "Resource and admission + control functions in Next Generation Networks", + September 2006. + +Author's Address + + Dong Sun + Alcatel-Lucent + 600 Mountain Ave + Murray Hill, NJ 07974 + USA + + Phone: +1 908 582 2617 + EMail: dongsun@alcatel-lucent.com + + + + + + + +Sun Informational [Page 5] + -- cgit v1.2.3