diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'internet-draft-anytun.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | internet-draft-anytun.txt | 672 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 672 deletions
diff --git a/internet-draft-anytun.txt b/internet-draft-anytun.txt deleted file mode 100644 index e61e7ca..0000000 --- a/internet-draft-anytun.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,672 +0,0 @@ - - - -Network Working Group O. Gsenger -Internet-Draft March 2007 -Expires: September 2, 2007 - - - anycast tunneling and relay protocol - draft-gsenger-anycast-relay-00 - -Status of this Memo - - By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any - applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware - have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes - aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. - - Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering - Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that - other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- - Drafts. - - Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months - and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any - time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference - material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - - The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at - http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. - - The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at - http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. - - This Internet-Draft will expire on September 2, 2007. - -Copyright Notice - - Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 1] - -Internet-Draft anycast tunneling and relay protocol March 2007 - - -Abstract - - The anycast tunneling and relay protocol (anytun) defines a protocol - used for communication between unicast clients and anycast servers. - It can be used for tunneling information between 2 clients over the - anycast servers or in relay mode to transmit data form the client - over the anycast servers to a third party not using the protocol and - vice versa. Unlike other tunneling protocols like GRE or IPIP - tunnels which indeed will work with anycast as well, anytun directly - includes cryptography and authentication. In relay mode it also - supports source NAT with integrated NAT transversal. It is intended - to deliver a high performance and reliability solution for tunneling - and relaying of data over servers, where direct client to client - connections are not possible or not wanted. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 2] - -Internet-Draft anycast tunneling and relay protocol March 2007 - - -1. Introduction - - anytun defines a Host Anycast Service as defined in rfc1546. It uses - a peer-to-peer achitecture, with anycast servers and unicast clients. - It can be used to build high scalable and redundant tunnel services. - It also has a relay mode, that makes it possible, that only one of - the connection endpoints has to use the anytun protocol. This can be - used to make connections through Firewalls or behind a NAT Router - - RFC3068 [1] DTD. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 3] - -Internet-Draft anycast tunneling and relay protocol March 2007 - - -2. Operation modes - - This section gives an overview of possible operation modes und usage - scenarios. Please note, that the protocols used in the figures are - only examples and that anytun itself does not care about either - transport protocols or encapsulated protocols. Routing and network - address translation is not done by anytun. Each implemetation MAY - choose it's own way of doing this task (e.g. using functions provided - by the operating system). Anytun is used to establish and controll - tunnnels, to encapsulate and encrypt data. - -2.1. Usage scenarions - -2.1.1. tunneling from unicast client over anycast servers to unicast - client - - An example of anytun used in tunnel mode - - ----------- ----------- - | RTP | ---------- | RTP | - ----------- -> |server 1| -> ----------- - | UDP | ---------- | UDP | - ----------- ----------- - ----- | IPv6 | ---------- | IPv6 | ----- - | | -> ----------- -> |server 2| -> ----------- -> | | - ----- | anytun | ---------- | anytun | ----- - ##### ----------- ----------- ##### - | UDP | ---------- | UDP | - client 1 ----------- -> |server 3| -> ----------- client 2 - | IPv4 | ---------- | IPv4 | - ----------- ----------- - | ... | anycast | ... | - - Figure 1 - - In tunneling mode the payload of the anytun packet is transmitted - from one unicast host to the anycast server. This server makes a - routing descision based on the underlying protocol and transmits a - new anytun package to one or more clients depending on the routing - descition. The server MAY also route the packet to a directly - connected network or a service running on the server, but please - note, that this is only usefull for anycast host services like DNS - and that the services HAVE TO be running on all servers in order to - work. - - - - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 4] - -Internet-Draft anycast tunneling and relay protocol March 2007 - - -2.1.2. tunneling from client to a server connected network - - An example of anytun used in open tunnel mode - - ----------- - | RTP | ---------- - ----------- -> |server 1| -> - | UDP | ---------- ----------- - ----------- | RTP | - ----- | IPv6 | ---------- ----------- ----- - | | -> ----------- -> |server 2| -> | UDP* | -> | | - ----- | anytun | ---------- ----------- ----- - ##### ----------- | IPv6* | ##### - | UDP | ---------- ----------- - client 1 ----------- -> |server 3| -> | ... | host - | IPv4 | ---------- not using - ----------- anytun - | ... | anycast - *changed source address - or port - - Figure 2 - - In open tunnel mode only one of two clients talking to each other - over the servers MUST use the anytun protocol. When a client using - the anytun protocol wants to tunnel data, it is building a connection - to the anycast servers using the anytun protocol. The anycast - servers relay the encapsulated packages directly to the destination - without using the anytun protocol. The source address of the - datagramm HAS TO be changed to the anycast address of the server. - The anytun servers act like a source NAT router, therefor for the - destination it saems that it is talking to the client directly. - -2.2. Transport modes - - Anytun does not define wich lower layer protocols HAVE TO be used, - but it's most likely used on top of udp. This section should only - discuss some issues on udp in combination with anycasting and - tunnels. - - - - - - - - - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 5] - -Internet-Draft anycast tunneling and relay protocol March 2007 - - -2.2.1. Using UDP - - An example of anytun used with udp as transport - - ----------- ----------- - | RTP | ---------- | RTP | - ----------- -> |server 1| -> ----------- - | UDP | ---------- | UDP | - ----------- ----------- - ----- | IPv6 | ---------- | IPv6 | ----- - | | -> ----------- -> |server 2| -> ----------- -> | | - ----- | anytun | ---------- | anytun | ----- - ##### ----------- ----------- ##### - | UDP | ---------- | UDP | - client 1 ----------- -> |server 3| -> ----------- client 2 - | IPv4 | ---------- | IPv4 | - ----------- ----------- - | ... | anycast | ... | - - Figure 3 - - When using UDP no flow controll or retransmission is done, neigther - by UDP nor anytun. The encapsulated protocol HAS TO take care of - this tasks if needed. UDP however has a checksum of the complete udp - datagram, so a packet gets discarded if there is a biterror in the - payload - -2.2.2. Using lightUDP - - An example of anytun used with udp transport - - ----------- ----------- - | RTP | ---------- | RTP | - ----------- -> |server 1| -> ----------- - | UDP | ---------- | UDP | - ----------- ----------- - ----- | IPv6 | ---------- | IPv6 | ----- - | | -> ----------- -> |server 2| -> ----------- -> | | - ----- | anytun | ---------- | anytun | ----- - ##### ----------- ----------- ##### - |lightUDP | ---------- |lightUDP | - client 1 ----------- -> |server 3| -> ----------- client 2 - | IPv4 | ---------- | IPv4 | - ----------- ----------- - | ... | anycast | ... | - - Figure 4 - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 6] - -Internet-Draft anycast tunneling and relay protocol March 2007 - - - The difference between normal UDP and lightUDP is, that the udp size - is not set to the length of the full packet, but to the lenght of the - data used for the checksum and therefor the checksum is only - calculated for that part. When using lightUDP, the lenght HAS tO be - set to the udp header length + the anytun header lenght. So there is - no error correction or detection done on the payload. This can be - usefull if realtime data is beeing transimittet or the tunneled - protocol does error correction/detection by itself. - -2.2.3. Fragmentation - - The only way of fully supporting fragmentation would be to syncronise - fragments between all anycast servers. This is considered to be to - much overhead, so there are two non perfect solutions for this - problems. Either fragmentation HAS TO be disabled or if not all - fragments arrive at the same server the ip datagramm HAS TO be - discarded. As routing changes are not expected to occure very - frequently, the encapsulated protocol can do a retransmission and all - fragments will arrive at the new server. - -2.3. Protocol specification - -2.3.1. Header format - - Protocol Format - - 0 1 2 3 - 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 - +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ - |V=2| ???????????????????? | sequence number | | - +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | - +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | - | | payload lenght | payload type | | - | |-------------------------------+-------------------------------| | - | | .... payload ... | | - +-------------------------------+ | - | | | padding (OPTIONAL) | | - +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ - | ~ MKI (OPTIONAL) ~ | - | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | - | : authentication tag (RECOMMENDED) : | - | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | - | | - +- Encrypted Portion* Authenticated Portion ---+ - - Figure 5 - - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 7] - -Internet-Draft anycast tunneling and relay protocol March 2007 - - -2.3.2. payload type field - - The protocol field defines the payload protocol. ETHER TYPE protocol - numerbers are used. http://www.iana.org/assignments/ethernet-numbers - . The values 0000-05DC are reserverd and not used at the moment. - - Some exmples for protocol types - - HEX - 0000 Reserved - .... Reserved - 05DC Reserved - 0800 Internet IP (IPv4) - 6558 transparent ethernet bridging - 86DD IPv6 - - Figure 6 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 8] - -Internet-Draft anycast tunneling and relay protocol March 2007 - - -Appendix A. The appan - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 9] - -Internet-Draft anycast tunneling and relay protocol March 2007 - - -3. References - - [1] Huitema, C., "An Anycast Prefix for 6to4 Relay Routers", - RFC 3068, June 2001. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 10] - -Internet-Draft anycast tunneling and relay protocol March 2007 - - -Author's Address - - Othmar Gsenger - Sporgasse 6 - Graz 8010 - AT - - Phone: - Email: otti@wirdorange.org - URI: http://anytun.org/ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 11] - -Internet-Draft anycast tunneling and relay protocol March 2007 - - -Full Copyright Statement - - Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). - - This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions - contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors - retain all their rights. - - This document and the information contained herein are provided on an - "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS - OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND - THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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. - - -Intellectual Property - - The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any - Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to - pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in - this document or the extent to which any license under such rights - might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has - made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information - on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be - found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. - - Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any - assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an - attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of - such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this - specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at - http://www.ietf.org/ipr. - - The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any - copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary - rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement - this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at - ietf-ipr@ietf.org. - - -Acknowledgment - - Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF - Administrative Support Activity (IASA). - - - - - -Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 12] - |