From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Mon Oct 8 18:09:21 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 18:09:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5023 on The Atom Publishing Protocol Message-ID: <20071009010921.E43D5E667C@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5023 Title: The Atom Publishing Protocol Author: J. Gregorio, Ed., B. de hOra, Ed. Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: joe at bitworking.org, bill at dehora.net Pages: 53 Characters: 102274 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-atompub-protocol-17.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5023.txt The Atom Publishing Protocol (AtomPub) is an application-level protocol for publishing and editing Web resources. The protocol is based on HTTP transfer of Atom-formatted representations. The Atom format is documented in the Atom Syndication Format. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Atom Publishing Format and Protocol Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Mon Oct 8 18:09:33 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2007 18:09:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 4980 on Analysis of Multihoming in Network Mobility Support Message-ID: <20071009010933.1E108E667E@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 4980 Title: Analysis of Multihoming in Network Mobility Support Author: C. Ng, T. Ernst, E. Paik, M. Bagnulo Status: Informational Date: October 2007 Mailbox: chanwah.ng at sg.panasonic.com, thierry.ernst at inria.fr, euna at kt.co.kr, marcelo at it.uc3m.es Pages: 39 Characters: 88572 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-nemo-multihoming-issues-07.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4980.txt This document is an analysis of multihoming in the context of network mobility (NEMO) in IPv6. As there are many situations in which mobile networks may be multihomed, a taxonomy is proposed to classify the possible configurations. The possible deployment scenarios of multihomed mobile networks are described together with the associated issues when network mobility is supported by RFC 3963 (NEMO Basic Support). Recommendations are offered on how to address these issues. This memo provides information for the Internet community. This document is a product of the Network Mobility Working Group of the IETF. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Fri Oct 12 12:37:05 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 12:37:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5037 on Experience with the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Message-ID: <20071012193705.D2E23E6F4A@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5037 Title: Experience with the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Author: L. Andersson, Ed., I. Minei, Ed., B. Thomas, Ed. Status: Informational Date: October 2007 Mailbox: loa at pi.se, ina at juniper.net, rhthomas at cisco.com Pages: 7 Characters: 13886 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-experience-00.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5037.txt The purpose of this memo is to document how some of the requirements specified in RFC 1264 for advancing protocols developed by working groups within the IETF Routing Area to Draft Standard have been satisfied by LDP (Label Distribution Protocol). Specifically, this report documents operational experience with LDP, requirement 5 of section 5.0 in RFC 1264. This memo provides information for the Internet community. This document is a product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Fri Oct 12 12:36:54 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 12:36:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5036 on LDP Specification Message-ID: <20071012193654.2AD69E6F48@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5036 Title: LDP Specification Author: L. Andersson, Ed., I. Minei, Ed., B. Thomas, Ed. Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: loa at pi.se, ina at juniper.net, rhthomas at cisco.com Pages: 135 Characters: 287101 Obsoletes: RFC3036 See-Also: I-D Tag: draft-ietf-mpls-rfc3036bis-04.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5036.txt The architecture for Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) is described in RFC 3031. A fundamental concept in MPLS is that two Label Switching Routers (LSRs) must agree on the meaning of the labels used to forward traffic between and through them. This common understanding is achieved by using a set of procedures, called a label distribution protocol, by which one LSR informs another of label bindings it has made. This document defines a set of such procedures called LDP (for Label Distribution Protocol) by which LSRs distribute labels to support MPLS forwarding along normally routed paths. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Draft Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Fri Oct 12 12:37:15 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 12:37:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5038 on The Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Implementation Survey Results Message-ID: <20071012193715.12983E6F4C@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5038 Title: The Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Implementation Survey Results Author: B. Thomas, L. Andersson Status: Informational Date: October 2007 Mailbox: rhthomas at cisco.com, loa at pi.se Pages: 23 Characters: 46890 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-survey2002-00.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5038.txt Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS), described in RFC 3031, is a method for forwarding packets that uses short, fixed-length values carried by packets, called labels, to determine packet next hops. A fundamental concept in MPLS is that two Label Switching Routers (LSRs) must agree on the meaning of the labels used to forward traffic between and through them. This common understanding is achieved by using a set of procedures, called a Label Distribution Protocol (as described in RFC 3036) , by which one LSR informs another of label bindings it has made. One such protocol, called LDP, is used by LSRs to distribute labels to support MPLS forwarding along normally routed paths. This document reports on a survey of LDP implementations conducted in August 2002 as part of the process of advancing LDP from Proposed to Draft Standard. This memo provides information for the Internet community. This document is a product of the Multiprotocol Label Switching Working Group of the IETF. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Tue Oct 16 18:06:30 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:06:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5016 on Requirements for a DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signing Practices Protocol Message-ID: <20071017010630.10229E7CF1@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5016 Title: Requirements for a DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Signing Practices Protocol Author: M. Thomas Status: Informational Date: October 2007 Mailbox: mat at cisco.com Pages: Characters: 33710 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements-05.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5016.txt DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) provides a cryptographic mechanism for domains to assert responsibility for the messages they handle. A related mechanism will allow an administrator to publish various statements about their DKIM signing practices. This document defines requirements for this mechanism, distinguishing between those that must be satisfied (MUST), and those that are highly desirable (SHOULD). This memo provides information for the Internet community. This document is a product of the Domain Keys Identified Mail Working Group of the IETF. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Tue Oct 16 18:06:21 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:06:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5015 on Bidirectional Protocol Independent Multicast (BIDIR-PIM) Message-ID: <20071017010621.4DA6DE7CEF@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5015 Title: Bidirectional Protocol Independent Multicast (BIDIR-PIM) Author: M. Handley, I. Kouvelas, T. Speakman, L. Vicisano Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: M.Handley at cs.ucl.ac.uk, kouvelas at cisco.com, speakman at cisco.com, lorenzo at digitalfountain.com Pages: 43 Characters: 96431 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-pim-bidir-09.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5015.txt This document discusses Bidirectional PIM (BIDIR-PIM), a variant of PIM Sparse-Mode that builds bidirectional shared trees connecting multicast sources and receivers. Bidirectional trees are built using a fail-safe Designated Forwarder (DF) election mechanism operating on each link of a multicast topology. With the assistance of the DF, multicast data is natively forwarded from sources to the Rendezvous-Point (RP) and hence along the shared tree to receivers without requiring source-specific state. The DF election takes place at RP discovery time and provides the route to the RP, thus eliminating the requirement for data-driven protocol events. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Protocol Independent Multicast Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Tue Oct 16 18:06:44 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:06:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5027 on Security Preconditions for Session Description Protocol (SDP) Media Streams Message-ID: <20071017010644.F0AB8E7CF3@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5027 Title: Security Preconditions for Session Description Protocol (SDP) Media Streams Author: F. Andreasen, D. Wing Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: fandreas at cisco.com, dwing at cisco.com Pages: 16 Characters: 37229 Updates: RFC3312 See-Also: I-D Tag: draft-ietf-mmusic-securityprecondition-04.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5027.txt This document defines a new security precondition for the Session Description Protocol (SDP) precondition framework described in RFCs 3312 and 4032. A security precondition can be used to delay session establishment or modification until media stream security for a secure media stream has been negotiated successfully. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Multiparty Multimedia Session Control Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Tue Oct 16 18:07:02 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:07:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5078 on IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Revision of the Nominating and Recall Committees Timeline Message-ID: <20071017010702.E65A3E7CF7@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5078 Title: IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Revision of the Nominating and Recall Committees Timeline Author: S. Dawkins Status: Informational Date: October 2007 Mailbox: spencer at mcsr-labs.org Pages: 9 Characters: 19870 Updates: RFC3777 See-Also: I-D Tag: draft-dawkins-nomcom-start-earlier-02.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5078.txt RFC 3777 defines the Nominations and Recall Committee's (NomCom's) operation, and includes a sample timeline for major steps in the NomCom process that meets the minimum normative requirements for the process. Recent NomComs have been scheduling based on the sample timeline, and the chairs of the last three NomComs -- Danny McPherson (2004-2005), Ralph Droms (2005-2006), and Andrew Lange (2006-2007) -- have all reported that this timeline is very aggressive and suggested starting earlier. This document restructures the sample timeline, but makes no normative process changes. This memo provides information for the Internet community. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Tue Oct 16 18:06:53 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:06:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5063 on Extensions to GMPLS Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Graceful Restart Message-ID: <20071017010653.8ECAAE7CF5@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5063 Title: Extensions to GMPLS Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Graceful Restart Author: A. Satyanarayana, Ed., R. Rahman, Ed. Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: asatyana at cisco.com, rrahman at cisco.com Pages: 24 Characters: 58542 Updates: RFC2961, RFC3473 See-Also: I-D Tag: draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-restart-ext-09.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5063.txt This document describes extensions to the Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Graceful Restart mechanisms defined in RFC 3473. The extensions enable the recovery of RSVP signaling state based on the Path message last sent by the node being restarted. Previously defined Graceful Restart mechanisms, also called recovery from nodal faults, permit recovery of signaling state from adjacent nodes when the data plane has retained the associated forwarding state across a restart. Those mechanisms do not fully support signaling state recovery on ingress nodes or recovery of all RSVP objects. The extensions defined in this document build on the RSVP Hello extensions defined in RFC 3209, and extensions for state recovery on nodal faults defined in RFC 3473. Using these extensions, the restarting node can recover all previously transmitted Path state, including the Explicit Route Object and the downstream (outgoing) interface identifiers. The extensions can also be used to recover signaling state after the restart of an ingress node. These extensions are not used to create or restore data plane state. The extensions optionally support the use of Summary Refresh, defined in RFC 2961, to reduce the number of messages exchanged during the Recovery Phase when the restarting node has recovered signaling state locally for one or more Label Switched Paths (LSPs). [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Thu Oct 18 10:12:04 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 10:12:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5028 on A Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) Service Registration for Instant Messaging (IM) Services Message-ID: <20071018171204.3F826E8129@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5028 Title: A Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) Service Registration for Instant Messaging (IM) Services Author: R. Mahy Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: rohan at ekabal.com Pages: 5 Characters: 9804 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-enum-im-service-03.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5028.txt This document registers a Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) service for Instant Messaging (IM). Specifically, this document focuses on provisioning 'im:' URIs (Uniform Resource Identifiers) in ENUM. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Telephone Number Mapping Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Tue Oct 23 11:27:37 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:27:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5053 on Raptor Forward Error Correction Scheme for Object Delivery Message-ID: <20071023182737.EE5CCE8861@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5053 Title: Raptor Forward Error Correction Scheme for Object Delivery Author: M. Luby, A. Shokrollahi, M. Watson, T. Stockhammer Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: luby at digitalfountain.com, amin.shokrollahi at epfl.ch, mark at digitalfountain.com, stockhammer at nomor.de Pages: 46 Characters: 113743 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-rmt-bb-fec-raptor-object-09.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5053.txt This document describes a Fully-Specified Forward Error Correction (FEC) scheme, corresponding to FEC Encoding ID 1, for the Raptor forward error correction code and its application to reliable delivery of data objects. Raptor is a fountain code, i.e., as many encoding symbols as needed can be generated by the encoder on-the-fly from the source symbols of a source block of data. The decoder is able to recover the source block from any set of encoding symbols only slightly more in number than the number of source symbols. The Raptor code described here is a systematic code, meaning that all the source symbols are among the encoding symbols that can be generated. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Reliable Multicast Transport Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Tue Oct 23 17:20:02 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 17:20:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5051 on i; unicode-casemap - Simple Unicode Collation Algorithm Message-ID: <20071024002002.CE54AE88FA@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5051 Title: i;unicode-casemap - Simple Unicode Collation Algorithm Author: M. Crispin Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: MRC at CAC.Washington.EDU Pages: 7 Characters: 14965 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-crispin-collation-unicasemap-07.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5051.txt This document describes "i;unicode-casemap", a simple case-insensitive collation for Unicode strings. It provides equality, substring, and ordering operations. [STANDARDS TRACK] This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Thu Oct 25 17:07:01 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 17:07:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5030 on Mobile IPv4 RADIUS Requirements Message-ID: <20071026000701.41AA7E8E5F@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5030 Title: Mobile IPv4 RADIUS Requirements Author: M. Nakhjiri, Ed., K. Chowdhury, A. Lior, K. Leung Status: Informational Date: October 2007 Mailbox: madjid.nakhjiri at motorola.com, kchowdhury at starentnetworks.com, avi at bridgewatersystems.com, kleung at cisco.com Pages: 9 Characters: 20319 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-mip4-radius-requirements-04.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5030.txt This document provides an applicability statement as well as a scope definition for specifying Remote Authentication Dial-In User Service (RADIUS) extensions to support Mobile IPv4. The goal is to allow specification of RADIUS attributes to assist the Mobile IPv4 signaling procedures. This memo provides information for the Internet community. This document is a product of the Mobility for IPv4 Working Group of the IETF. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:52:27 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:52:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5026 on Mobile IPv6 Bootstrapping in Split Scenario Message-ID: <20071031225227.65F23E9EDC@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5026 Title: Mobile IPv6 Bootstrapping in Split Scenario Author: G. Giaretta, Ed., J. Kempf, V. Devarapalli, Ed. Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: gerardog at qualcomm.com, kempf at docomolabs-usa.com, vijay.devarapalli at azairenet.com Pages: 28 Characters: 63138 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-mip6-bootstrapping-split-07.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5026.txt A Mobile IPv6 node requires a Home Agent address, a home address, and IPsec security associations with its Home Agent before it can start utilizing Mobile IPv6 service. RFC 3775 requires that some or all of these are statically configured. This document defines how a Mobile IPv6 node can bootstrap this information from non-topological information and security credentials pre-configured on the Mobile Node. The solution defined in this document solves the split scenario described in the Mobile IPv6 bootstrapping problem statement in RFC 4640. The split scenario refers to the case where the Mobile Node's mobility service is authorized by a different service provider than basic network access. The solution described in this document is also generically applicable to any bootstrapping case, since other scenarios are more specific realizations of the split scenario. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Mobility for IPv6 Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:52:44 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:52:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 4988 on Mobile IPv4 Fast Handovers Message-ID: <20071031225244.C6D59E9EDE@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 4988 Title: Mobile IPv4 Fast Handovers Author: R. Koodli, C. Perkins Status: Experimental Date: October 2007 Mailbox: rajeev.koodli at nokia.com, charles.perkins at nokia.com Pages: 28 Characters: 57921 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-mip4-fmipv4-07.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc4988.txt This document adapts the Mobile IPv6 Fast Handovers to improve delay and packet loss resulting from Mobile IPv4 handover operations. Specifically, this document addresses movement detection, IP address configuration, and location update latencies during a handover. For reducing the IP address configuration latency, the document proposes that the new Care-of Address is always made to be the new access router's IP address. This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. This document is a product of the Mobility for IPv4 Working Group of the IETF. EXPERIMENTAL: 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. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:53:48 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:53:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5043 on Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Direct Data Placement (DDP) Adaptation Message-ID: <20071031225348.CA904E9EE8@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5043 Title: Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Direct Data Placement (DDP) Adaptation Author: C. Bestler, Ed., R. Stewart, Ed. Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: caitlin.bestler at neterion.com, rrs at cisco.com Pages: 18 Characters: 38740 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-rddp-sctp-07.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5043.txt This document specifies an adaptation layer to provide a Lower Layer Protocol (LLP) service for Direct Data Placement (DDP) using the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP). [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Remote Direct Data Placement Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:53:31 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:53:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5041 on Direct Data Placement over Reliable Transports Message-ID: <20071031225331.AD538E9EE4@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5041 Title: Direct Data Placement over Reliable Transports Author: H. Shah, J. Pinkerton, R. Recio, P. Culley Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: hemal at broadcom.com, jpink at microsoft.com, recio at us.ibm.com, paul.culley at hp.com Pages: 38 Characters: 84642 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-rddp-ddp-07.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5041.txt The Direct Data Placement protocol provides information to Place the incoming data directly into an upper layer protocol's receive buffer without intermediate buffers. This removes excess CPU and memory utilization associated with transferring data through the intermediate buffers. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Remote Direct Data Placement Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:53:05 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:53:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5082 on The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) Message-ID: <20071031225305.E83A0E9EE0@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5082 Title: The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) Author: V. Gill, J. Heasley, D. Meyer, P. Savola, Ed., C. Pignataro Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: vijay at umbc.edu, heas at shrubbery.net, dmm at 1-4-5.net, psavola at funet.fi, cpignata at cisco.com Pages: 16 Characters: 36579 Obsoletes: RFC3682 See-Also: I-D Tag: draft-ietf-rtgwg-rfc3682bis-10.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5082.txt The use of a packet's Time to Live (TTL) (IPv4) or Hop Limit (IPv6) to verify whether the packet was originated by an adjacent node on a connected link has been used in many recent protocols. This document generalizes this technique. This document obsoletes Experimental RFC 3682. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Routing Area Working Group Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:53:25 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:53:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5040 on A Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol Specification Message-ID: <20071031225325.383D4E9EE2@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5040 Title: A Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol Specification Author: R. Recio, B. Metzler, P. Culley, J. Hilland, D. Garcia Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: recio at us.ibm.com, bmt at zurich.ibm.com, paul.culley at hp.com, jeff.hilland at hp.com, Dave.Garcia at StanfordAlumni.org Pages: 66 Characters: 142247 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-rddp-rdmap-07.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5040.txt This document defines a Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol (RDMAP) that operates over the Direct Data Placement Protocol (DDP protocol). RDMAP provides read and write services directly to applications and enables data to be transferred directly into Upper Layer Protocol (ULP) Buffers without intermediate data copies. It also enables a kernel bypass implementation. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Remote Direct Data Placement Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:54:05 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:54:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5045 on Applicability of Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol (RDMA) and Direct Data Placement (DDP) Message-ID: <20071031225405.105DFE9EEC@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5045 Title: Applicability of Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol (RDMA) and Direct Data Placement (DDP) Author: C. Bestler, Ed., L. Coene Status: Informational Date: October 2007 Mailbox: caitlin.bestler at neterion.com, lode.coene at nsn.com Pages: 22 Characters: 51749 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-rddp-applicability-08.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5045.txt This document describes the applicability of Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol (RDMAP) and the Direct Data Placement Protocol (DDP). It compares and contrasts the different transport options over IP that DDP can use, provides guidance to ULP developers on choosing between available transports and/or how to be indifferent to the specific transport layer used, compares use of DDP with direct use of the supporting transports, and compares DDP over IP transports with non-IP transports that support RDMA functionality. This memo provides information for the Internet community. This document is a product of the Remote Direct Data Placement Working Group of the IETF. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:53:57 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:53:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5044 on Marker PDU Aligned Framing for TCP Specification Message-ID: <20071031225357.20A86E9EEA@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5044 Title: Marker PDU Aligned Framing for TCP Specification Author: P. Culley, U. Elzur, R. Recio, S. Bailey, J. Carrier Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: paul.culley at hp.com, uri at broadcom.com, recio at us.ibm.com, steph at sandburst.com, carrier at cray.com Pages: 74 Characters: 168918 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-rddp-mpa-08.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5044.txt Marker PDU Aligned Framing (MPA) is designed to work as an "adaptation layer" between TCP and the Direct Data Placement protocol (DDP) as described in RFC 5041. It preserves the reliable, in-order delivery of TCP, while adding the preservation of higher-level protocol record boundaries that DDP requires. MPA is fully compliant with applicable TCP RFCs and can be utilized with existing TCP implementations. MPA also supports integrated implementations that combine TCP, MPA and DDP to reduce buffering requirements in the implementation and improve performance at the system level. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Remote Direct Data Placement Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:54:23 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:54:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5046 on Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI) Extensions for Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA) Message-ID: <20071031225423.BD3D7E9EEE@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5046 Title: Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI) Extensions for Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA) Author: M. Ko, M. Chadalapaka, J. Hufferd, U. Elzur, H. Shah, P. Thaler Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: mako at us.ibm.com, cbm at rose.hp.com, jhufferd at brocade.com, Uri at Broadcom.com, hemal at broadcom.com, pthaler at broadcom.com Pages: 85 Characters: 202216 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-ips-iser-06.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5046.txt Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI) Extensions for Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA) provides the RDMA data transfer capability to iSCSI by layering iSCSI on top of an RDMA-Capable Protocol, such as the iWARP protocol suite. An RDMA-Capable Protocol provides RDMA Read and Write services, which enable data to be transferred directly into SCSI I/O Buffers without intermediate data copies. This document describes the extensions to the iSCSI protocol to support RDMA services as provided by an RDMA-Capable Protocol, such as the iWARP protocol suite. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the IP Storage Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:53:41 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5042 on Direct Data Placement Protocol (DDP) / Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol (RDMAP) Security Message-ID: <20071031225341.B5513E9EE6@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5042 Title: Direct Data Placement Protocol (DDP) / Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol (RDMAP) Security Author: J. Pinkerton, E. Deleganes Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: jpink at windows.microsoft.com, deleganes at yahoo.com Pages: 52 Characters: 127453 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-rddp-security-10.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5042.txt This document analyzes security issues around implementation and use of the Direct Data Placement Protocol (DDP) and Remote Direct Memory Access Protocol (RDMAP). It first defines an architectural model for an RDMA Network Interface Card (RNIC), which can implement DDP or RDMAP and DDP. The document reviews various attacks against the resources defined in the architectural model and the countermeasures that can be used to protect the system. Attacks are grouped into those that can be mitigated by using secure communication channels across the network, attacks from Remote Peers, and attacks from Local Peers. Attack categories include spoofing, tampering, information disclosure, denial of service, and elevation of privilege. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Remote Direct Data Placement Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:54:40 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:54:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5048 on Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI) Corrections and Clarifications Message-ID: <20071031225440.68E7CE9EF2@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5048 Title: Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI) Corrections and Clarifications Author: M. Chadalapaka, Ed. Status: Standards Track Date: October 2007 Mailbox: cbm at rose.hp.com Pages: 38 Characters: 80149 Updates: RFC3720 See-Also: I-D Tag: draft-ietf-ips-iscsi-impl-guide-09.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5048.txt The Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI) is a SCSI transport protocol and maps the SCSI architecture and command sets onto TCP/IP. RFC 3720 defines the iSCSI protocol. This document compiles the clarifications to the original protocol definition in RFC 3720 to serve as a companion document for the iSCSI implementers. This document updates RFC 3720 and the text in this document supersedes the text in RFC 3720 when the two differ. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the IP Storage Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... From rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org Wed Oct 31 15:54:33 2007 From: rfc-editor at rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org) Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 15:54:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [rfc-dist] RFC 5047 on DA: Datamover Architecture for the Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI) Message-ID: <20071031225433.99B0AE9EF0@bosco.isi.edu> A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5047 Title: DA: Datamover Architecture for the Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI) Author: M. Chadalapaka, J. Hufferd, J. Satran, H. Shah Status: Informational Date: October 2007 Mailbox: cbm at rose.hp.com, jhufferd at brocade.com, Julian_Satran at il.ibm.com, hemal at broadcom.com Pages: 49 Characters: 107970 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-ips-iwarp-da-05.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5047.txt The Internet Small Computer System Interface (iSCSI) is a SCSI transport protocol that maps the SCSI family of application protocols onto TCP/IP. Datamover Architecture for iSCSI (DA) defines an abstract model in which the movement of data between iSCSI end nodes is logically separated from the rest of the iSCSI protocol in order to allow iSCSI to adapt to innovations available in new IP transports. While DA defines the architectural functions required of the class of Datamover protocols, it does not define any specific Datamover protocols. Each such Datamover protocol, defined in a separate document, provides a reliable transport for all iSCSI PDUs, but actually moves the data required for certain iSCSI PDUs without involving the remote iSCSI layer itself. This document begins with an introduction of a few new abstractions, defines a layered architecture for iSCSI and Datamover protocols, and then models the interactions within an iSCSI end node between the iSCSI layer and the Datamover layer that happen in order to transparently perform remote data movement within an IP fabric. It is intended that this definition will help map iSCSI to generic Remote Direct Memory Access (RDMA)-capable IP fabrics in the future comprising TCP, the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), and possibly other underlying network transport layers, such as InfiniBand. This memo provides information for the Internet community. This document is a product of the IP Storage Working Group of the IETF. INFORMATIONAL: This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST at IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info at RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR at RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ...