From 73c9b993bfdf02306e662ede7b40ec68498f7fec Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Othmar Gsenger Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 20:48:43 +0000 Subject: protokoll umbenannt --- internet-draft-anytun.txt | 672 ---------------------------------------------- internet-draft-anytun.xml | 208 -------------- internet-draft-satp.txt | 672 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ internet-draft-satp.xml | 222 +++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 894 insertions(+), 880 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 internet-draft-anytun.txt delete mode 100644 internet-draft-anytun.xml create mode 100644 internet-draft-satp.txt create mode 100644 internet-draft-satp.xml 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] - diff --git a/internet-draft-anytun.xml b/internet-draft-anytun.xml deleted file mode 100644 index 80ed627..0000000 --- a/internet-draft-anytun.xml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,208 +0,0 @@ - - - -]> - - - anycast tunneling and relay protocol - - - - -
- - Sporgasse 6 - Graz - 8010 - AT - - - - otti@wirdorange.org - http://anytun.org/ -
- - - - - General - - anytun - Internet-Draft - anycast tunneling / relaying - tunnel - relay - protocol - - 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. - - - - -
- 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 DTD. -
-
- 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. -
- -
-
- 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 | ... | - -
- 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. -
- -
-
- 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 - -
- - 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. -
-
-
- 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. - -
-
- 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 | ... | - -
- 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 -
-
-
- 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 | ... | - -
- - 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. -
-
- - 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. - -
-
-
-
-
- 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 ---+ - -
- -
-
- 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 - -
- -
-
-
- - - - - &rfc3068; An Anycast Prefix for 6to4 Relay Routers - - - diff --git a/internet-draft-satp.txt b/internet-draft-satp.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..16faed2 --- /dev/null +++ b/internet-draft-satp.txt @@ -0,0 +1,672 @@ + + + +Network Working Group O. Gsenger +Internet-Draft March 2007 +Expires: September 2, 2007 + + + secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) + draft-gsenger-secure-anycast-tunneling-protocol-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 secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) March 2007 + + +Abstract + + The secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) defines a protocol used + for communication between any combination of unicast and anycast + tunnel endpoints. It has less protocol overhead than IPSec in Tunnel + mode and allows tunneling of every ETHER TYPE protocol (e.g. + ethernet, ip, arp ...). satp directly includes cryptography and + message authentication based on the methodes used by SRTP. It is + intended to deliver a generic, scaleable, secure and reliability + solution for tunneling and relaying of packets of any protocol. + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 2] + +Internet-Draft secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) 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 secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) 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 secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) 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 secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) 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 secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) 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 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | sequence number | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | + | | .... payload ... | | + | |-------------------------------+-------------------------------+ | + | | padding (OPT) | pad count(OPT)| payload type | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | ~ MKI (OPTIONAL) ~ | + | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | + | : authentication tag (RECOMMENDED) : | + | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | + | | + +- Encrypted Portion* Authenticated Portion ---+ + + Figure 5 + + + + + + + +Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 7] + +Internet-Draft secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) March 2007 + + +2.3.2. sequence number + + The sequenze number is a 32bit unsigned integer in network byte + order. It starts with a random value and is increased by 1 for every + sent packet. After the maximum value, it starts over from 0. This + overrun causes the ROC to be increased. + +2.3.3. payload + + A packet of the type payload type (e.g. an IP packet). + +2.3.4. padding (OPTINAL) + + Padding of max 255 ocitets. None of the pre-defined encryption + transforms uses any padding; for these, the plaintext and encrypted + payload sizes match exactly. Transforms are based on transforms of + the SRTP protocol and these transforms might use the RTP padding + format, so a RTP like padding is supported. If padding field is + present, than the padding count field MUST be set to the padding + lenght. + +2.3.5. padding count + + The number of octets of the padding field. This field is optional. + It's presents is signaled by the key management and not by this + protocol. If this field isn't present, the padding field MUST NOT be + present as well. + +2.3.6. payload type field + + The payload type 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 MUST NOT be used. + + Some examples 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 secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) March 2007 + + +Appendix A. The appan + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Gsenger Expires September 2, 2007 [Page 9] + +Internet-Draft secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) 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 secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) 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 secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) 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] + diff --git a/internet-draft-satp.xml b/internet-draft-satp.xml new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5011b75 --- /dev/null +++ b/internet-draft-satp.xml @@ -0,0 +1,222 @@ + + + + +]> + + + secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) + + + + +
+ + Sporgasse 6 + Graz + 8010 + AT + + + + otti@wirdorange.org + http://anytun.org/ +
+ + + + + General + + satp + Internet-Draft + secure anycast tunneling protocol + anycast + tunnel + secure + protocol + + The secure anycast tunneling protocol (satp) defines a protocol used for communication between any combination of unicast and anycast tunnel endpoints. It has less protocol overhead than IPSec in Tunnel mode and allows tunneling of every ETHER TYPE protocol (e.g. ethernet, ip, arp ...). satp directly includes cryptography and message authentication based on the methodes used by SRTP. It is intended to deliver a generic, scaleable, secure and reliability solution for tunneling and relaying of packets of any protocol. + + + + +
+ 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 DTD. +
+
+ 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. +
+ +
+
+ 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 | ... | + +
+ 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. +
+ +
+
+ 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 + +
+ + 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. +
+
+
+ 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. + +
+
+ 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 | ... | + +
+ 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 +
+
+
+ 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 | ... | + +
+ + 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. +
+
+ + 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. + +
+
+
+
+
+ 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 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | sequence number | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | + | | .... payload ... | | + | |-------------------------------+-------------------------------+ | + | | padding (OPT) | pad count(OPT)| payload type | | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | ~ MKI (OPTIONAL) ~ | + | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | + | : authentication tag (RECOMMENDED) : | + | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | + | | + +- Encrypted Portion* Authenticated Portion ---+ + +
+ +
+
+ The sequenze number is a 32bit unsigned integer in network byte order. It starts with a random value and is increased by 1 for every sent packet. After the maximum value, it starts over from 0. This overrun causes the ROC to be increased. +
+
+ A packet of the type payload type (e.g. an IP packet). +
+
+ Padding of max 255 ocitets. +None of the pre-defined encryption transforms uses any padding; for + these, the plaintext and encrypted payload sizes match exactly. Transforms are based on transforms of the SRTP protocol and these transforms might use the RTP padding format, so a RTP like padding is supported. If padding field is present, than the padding count field MUST be set to the padding lenght. +
+
+ The number of octets of the padding field. This field is optional. It's presents is signaled by the key management and not by this protocol. If this field isn't present, the padding field MUST NOT be present as well. +
+
+ The payload type 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 MUST NOT be used. +
+ Some examples for protocol types + +HEX +0000 Reserved +.... Reserved +05DC Reserved +0800 Internet IP (IPv4) +6558 transparent ethernet bridging +86DD IPv6 + +
+ +
+
+
+ + + + + &rfc3068; An Anycast Prefix for 6to4 Relay Routers + + + -- cgit v1.2.3