[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-xie-rserpool-asap) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 RFC 5352

Network Working Group                                         R. Stewart
Internet-Draft                                       Cisco Systems, Inc.
Expires: August 11, 2006                                          Q. Xie
                                                          Motorola, Inc.
                                                             M. Stillman
                                                                   Nokia
                                                               M. Tuexen
                                      Muenster Univ. of Applied Sciences
                                                        February 7, 2006


                Aggregate Server Access Protocol (ASAP)
                    draft-ietf-rserpool-asap-13.txt

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 August 11, 2006.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).

Abstract

   Aggregate Server Access Protocol (ASAP) in conjunction with the
   Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol (ENRP) [7] provides a high
   availability data transfer mechanism over IP networks.  ASAP uses a



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006                [Page 1]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   handle-based addressing model which isolates a logical communication
   endpoint from its IP address(es), thus effectively eliminating the
   binding between the communication endpoint and its physical IP
   address(es) which normally constitutes a single point of failure.

   In addition, ASAP defines each logical communication destination as a
   pool, providing full transparent support for server-pooling and load
   sharing.  It also allows dynamic system scalability - members of a
   server pool can be added or removed at any time without interrupting
   the service.

   ASAP is designed to take full advantage of the network level
   redundancy provided by the Stream Transmission Control Protocol
   (SCTP) RFC2960 [4].  Each transport protocol to be used by Pool
   Elements (PE) and Pool Users (PU) MUST have an accompanying
   transports mapping document.  Note that ASAP messages passed between
   PE's and ENRP servers MUST use SCTP.

   The high availability server pooling is gained by combining two
   protocols, namely ASAP and ENRP, in which ASAP provides the user
   interface for pool handle to address translation, load sharing
   management, and fault management while ENRP defines the high
   availability pool handle translation service.




























Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006                [Page 2]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     1.1.  Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
     1.2.  Organization of this document  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     1.3.  Scope of ASAP  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       1.3.1.  Extent of the Handlespace  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     1.4.  Conventions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   2.  Message Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     2.1.  ASAP Parameter Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     2.2.  ASAP Messages  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       2.2.1.  ASAP_REGISTRATION message  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       2.2.2.  ASAP_DEREGISTRATION message  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       2.2.3.  ASAP_REGISTRATION_RESPONSE message . . . . . . . . . . 10
       2.2.4.  ASAP_DEREGISTRATION_RESPONSE message . . . . . . . . . 10
       2.2.5.  ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION message . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
       2.2.6.  ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION_RESPONSE message  . . . . . . . 11
       2.2.7.  ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE message . . . . . . . . . . . 12
       2.2.8.  ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE_ACK message . . . . . . . . . 13
       2.2.9.  ASAP_ENDPOINT_UNREACHABLE message  . . . . . . . . . . 13
       2.2.10. ASAP_SERVER_ANNOUNCE message . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
       2.2.11. COOKIE message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       2.2.12. ASAP_COOKIE_ECHO message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       2.2.13. BUSINESS_CARD message  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
       2.2.14. ASAP_ERROR message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   3.  Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     3.1.  Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     3.2.  Deregistration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
     3.3.  Handle resolution  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
     3.4.  Endpoint keep alive  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
     3.5.  Reporting unreachable endpoints  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
     3.6.  ENRP server hunt procedures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
     3.7.  Handle ASAP to ENRP Communication Failures . . . . . . . . 22
       3.7.1.  SCTP Send Failure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
       3.7.2.  T1-ENRPrequest Timer Expiration  . . . . . . . . . . . 22
     3.8.  Cookie handling procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
     3.9.  Business Card handling procedures  . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
   4.  The ASAP Interfaces  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
     4.1.  Registration.Request Primitive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
     4.2.  Deregistration.Request Primitive . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
     4.3.  Cache.Populate.Request Primitive . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
     4.4.  Cache.Purge.Request Primitive  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
     4.5.  Data.Send.Request Primitive  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
       4.5.1.  Sending to a Pool Handle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
       4.5.2.  Pool Element Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
       4.5.3.  Sending to a Pool Element Handle . . . . . . . . . . . 29
       4.5.4.  Send by Transport Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
       4.5.5.  Message Delivery Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006                [Page 3]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


     4.6.  Data.Received Notification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
     4.7.  Error.Report Notification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
     4.8.  Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
       4.8.1.  Send to a New Pool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
       4.8.2.  Send to a Cached Pool Handle . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
     4.9.  PE send failure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
       4.9.1.  Translation.Request Primitive  . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
       4.9.2.  Transport.Failure Primitive  . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
   5.  Timers, Variables, and Thresholds  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
     5.1.  Timers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
     5.2.  Variables  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
     5.3.  Thresholds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
   6.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
     6.1.  Implementing Security Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
   7.  Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
   8.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
     8.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
     8.2.  Informational References (non-normative) . . . . . . . . . 41
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 43































Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006                [Page 4]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


1.  Introduction

   Aggregate Server Access Protocol (ASAP) in conjunction with ENRP [7]
   provides a high availability data transfer mechanism over IP
   networks.  ASAP uses a handle-based addressing model which isolates a
   logical communication endpoint from its IP address(es), thus
   effectively eliminating the binding between the communication
   endpoint and its physical IP address(es) which normally constitutes a
   single point of failure.

   When multiple receiver instances exist under the same handle, a.k.a,
   a server pool, ASAP will select one Pool Element (PE), based on the
   current load sharing policy indicated by the server pool, and deliver
   the message to the selected PE.

   While delivering the message, ASAP monitors the reachability of the
   selected PE.  If it is found unreachable, before notifying the sender
   of the failure, ASAP can automatically select another PE (if one
   exists) under that pool and attempt to deliver the message to that
   PE.  In other words, ASAP is capable of transparent fail-over amongst
   instances of a server pool.

   ASAP uses the Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol (ENRP) to
   provide a high availability pool handle space.  ASAP is responsible
   for the abstraction of the underlying transport technologies, load
   distribution management, fault management, as well as the
   presentation to the upper layer (i.e., the ASAP user) a unified
   primitive interface.

   When SCTP RFC2960 [4] is used as the transport layer protocol, ASAP
   can seamlessly incorporate the link-layer redundancy provided by the
   SCTP.

   This document defines the ASAP portion of the high availability
   server pool.  ASAP depends on the services of a high availability
   pool handle database a.k.a.  ENRP [7].

1.1.  Definitions

   This document uses the following terms:

   ASAP User: Either a PE or PU that uses ASAP.

   Operational scope: See [6];







Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006                [Page 5]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   Operational scope: See [6];

   Pool (or server pool): See [6];

   Pool handle: See [6];

   Pool element (PE): See [6];

   Pool user (PU): See [6];

   Pool element handle: See [6];

   ENRP handlespace (or handlespace): See [6];

   pool registrar: A server program running on a host that manages the
      handle space collectively with its peer ENRP servers and replies
      to the service requests from any Pool User or Pool Element.

   Home ENRP server: The ENRP server to which a PE or PU currently
      belongs.  A PE MUST only have one home ENRP server at any given
      time and both the PE and its home ENRP server MUST keep track of
      this master/slave relationship between them.  A PU SHOULD select
      one of the available ENRP servers as its home ENRP server, but the
      ENRP server does not need to know, nor does it need to keep track
      of this relationship.

   ENRP client channel: The communication channel through which an ASAP
      User (either a PE or PU) requests ENRP handlespace service.  The
      client channel is usually defined by the transport address of the
      home server and a well known port number.  The channel MAY make
      use of multi-cast or a named list of ENRP servers.

   Network Byte Order: Most significant byte first, a.k.a Big Endian.

   Transport address: A Transport Address is traditionally defined by
      Network Layer address, Transport Layer protocol and Transport
      Layer port number.  In the case of SCTP running over IP, a
      transport address is defined by the combination of an IP address
      and an SCTP port number (where SCTP is the Transport protocol).

1.2.  Organization of this document

   Section 2 details ASAP message formats.  In Section 3 we give the
   detailed ASAP procedures for the ASAP implementer.  And in Section 4
   we give the details of the ASAP interface, focusing on the
   communication primitives between the applications above ASAP and ASAP
   itself, and the communications primitives between ASAP and SCTP (or
   other transport layer).  Also included in this discussion is relevant



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006                [Page 6]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   timers and configurable parameters as appropriate.  Section 5
   provides threshold and protocol variables.

1.3.  Scope of ASAP

   The requirements for high availability and scalability do not imply
   requirements on shared state and data.  ASAP does not provide
   transaction failover.  If a host or application fails during
   processing of a transaction this transaction may be lost.  Some
   services may provide a way to handle the failure, but this is not
   guaranteed.  ASAP MAY provide hooks to assist an application in
   building a mechanism to share state but ASAP in itself will NOT share
   any state.

1.3.1.  Extent of the Handlespace

   The scope of the ASAP/ENRP is NOT Internet wide.  The handlespace is
   neither hierarchical nor arbitrarily large like DNS.  We propose a
   flat peer-to-peer model.  Pools of servers will exist in different
   administrative domains.  For example, suppose we want to use ASAP/
   ENRP.  First, the PU may use DNS to contact an ENRP server.  Suppose
   a PU in North America wishes to contact the server pool in Japan
   instead of North America.  The PU would use DNS to get the list of IP
   addresses of the Japanese server pool domain, that is, the ENRP
   client channel in Japan.  From there the PU would query the ENRP
   server and then directly contact the PE(s) of interest.

1.4.  Conventions

   The keywords MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD,
   SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, NOT RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL, when
   they appear in this document, are to be interpreted as described in
   RFC2119 [2].


















Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006                [Page 7]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


2.  Message Definitions

   All messages as well as their fields described below shall be in
   Network Byte Order during transmission.  For fields with a length
   bigger than 4 octets, a number in a pair of parentheses may follow
   the field name to indicate the length of the field in number of
   octets.

2.1.  ASAP Parameter Formats

   The basic message format and all parameter formats can be found in
   ENRP-ASAP [5].  Note also that ALL ASAP messages exchanged between an
   ENRP server and a PE MUST use SCTP as transport, while ASAP messages
   exchanged between an ENRP server and a PU MUST use either SCTP or TCP
   as transport.  PE to PU data traffic MAY use any transport protocol
   specified by the PE during registration.

2.2.  ASAP Messages

   This section details the individual messages used by ASAP.  These
   messages are composed of a standard message format found in Section 4
   of ENRP-ASAP [5].  The parameter descriptions may also be found in
   Section 3 of ENRP-ASAP [5].

   The following ASAP message types are defined in this section:


   Type       Message Name
   -----      -------------------------
   0x00       - (reserved by IETF)
   0x01       - ASAP_REGISTRATION
   0x02       - ASAP_DEREGISTRATION
   0x03       - ASAP_REGISTRATION_RESPONSE
   0x04       - ASAP_DEREGISTRATION_RESPONSE
   0x05       - ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION
   0x06       - ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION_RESPONSE
   0x07       - ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE
   0x08       - ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE_ACK
   0x09       - ASAP_ENDPOINT_UNREACHABLE
   0x0a       - ASAP_SERVER_ANNOUNCE
   0x0b       - ASAP_COOKIE
   0x0c       - ASAP_COOKIE_ECHO
   0x0d       - ASAP_BUSINESS_CARD
   0x0e       - ASAP_ERROR







Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006                [Page 8]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


2.2.1.  ASAP_REGISTRATION message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x01 |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                     Pool Handle Parameter                     :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                     Pool Element Parameter                    :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The pool handle parameter field specifies the handle to be
   registered.  The PE Parameter field MUST be filled in by the
   registrant endpoint to declare its transport address, server pooling
   policy and value, and other operational preferences.  Note that the
   ASAP_REGISTRATION message MUST use SCTP and the IP address(es) of the
   PE registered within the Pool Element Parameter MUST be a subset of
   the addresses of the SCTP association in respective of the transport
   protocol registered by the PE.

2.2.2.  ASAP_DEREGISTRATION message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x02 |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                     Pool Handle Parameter                     :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                    PE Identifier Parameter                    :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+++

   The PE sending the ASAP_DEREGISTRATION shall fill in the pool handle
   and the PE identifier parameter in order to allow the ENRP server to
   verify the identity of the endpoint.  Note that deregistration is NOT
   allowed by proxy, in other words a PE may only deregister itself.














Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006                [Page 9]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


2.2.3.  ASAP_REGISTRATION_RESPONSE message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x03 |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|R|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                     Pool Handle Parameter                     :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                    PE Identifier Parameter                    :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                   Operational Error (optional)                :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   R (Reject) flag

   When set to '1', indicate that the ENRP server that sent this message
   has rejected the registration.  Otherwise, the registration is
   granted.

   Operational Error

   This optional TLV parameter may be included if the registration was
   rejected.  This TLV, if present, indicates the cause of the
   rejection.  If the registration was successful this parameter is not
   included.

2.2.4.  ASAP_DEREGISTRATION_RESPONSE message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x04 |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                     Pool Handle Parameter                     :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                    PE Identifier Parameter                    :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                   Operational Error (optional)                :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Operational Error

   This optional TLV parameter is included if an error occurred during
   the deregistration process.  If the deregistration was successful
   this parameter is not included.





Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 10]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


2.2.5.  ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x05 |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                     Pool Handle Parameter                     :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   This message is sent to a ENRP server to request translation of the
   Pool Handle to a list of Pool Elements.  If sent from a PE the SCTP
   association used for registration SHOULD be used.

2.2.6.  ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION_RESPONSE message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x06 |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                     Pool Handle Parameter                     :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :             Overall PE Selection Policy (optional)            :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :               Pool Element Parameter 1 (optional)             :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                              ...                              :
   :                                                               :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :               Pool Element Parameter N (optional)             :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                   Operational Error (optional)                :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Overall PE Selection Policy:

   This TLV is a PE selection policy parameter and can be present when
   the response is positive.  It indicates the overall selection policy
   of the pool.  If not present, round-robin is assumed.  This TLV is
   not present when the response is negative (i.e., a rejection).

   Note, any load policy parameter inside the Pool Element Parameter (if
   present) MUST be ignored, and MUST NOT be used to determine the
   overall pool policy.

   Pool Element Parameters




Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 11]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   When the response is positive, an array of PE TLVs are included,
   indicating the current PEs and their information in the named pool.
   In a positive response, at least one PE TLV MUST be present.  When
   the response is negative, no PE TLVs are included.

   Operational Error

   The presence of this TLV indicates that the response is negative
   (i.e., the handle resolution request was rejected by the ENRP
   server).  The cause code in this TLV (if present) will indicate the
   reason the handle resolution request was rejected (e.g., the
   requested pool handle was not found).

2.2.7.  ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x07 |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|H|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       Server Identifier                       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                     Pool Handle Parameter                     :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   H (Home ENRP server) flag

   When set to '1', indicate that the ENRP server that sends this
   message want to be the home ENRP server of the receiver of this
   message.

   Server Identifier field indicates the sender ENRP server of the
   message.

   This message is sent to a PE by the ENRP server as a "health" check.
   If the transport level Heart Beat mechanism is insufficient, this
   adds heartbeat messages with the goal of determining health status at
   ASAP level in a possibly more timely fashion.  (The transport level
   Heart Beat may sometimes be considered insufficient due to that time
   outs are set for too long or heartbeats are not frequent enough, or,
   that the transport level Heart Beat mechanism's coverage is limited
   only to the transport level at the two ends.)

   Using ASAP keepalive also has additional value to the reliability of
   fault detection when SCTP stack is in the kernel.  In such a case,
   while SCTP level heartbeat monitors the end-to-end connectivity
   between the two SCTP stacks, ASAP keepalive monitors the end-to-end
   liveliness of the ASAP layer above it.



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 12]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


2.2.8.  ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE_ACK message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x08 |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                     Pool Handle Parameter                     :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                    PE Identifier Parameter                    :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   This message is sent by the PE to the ENRP server as an
   acknowledgment to the ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE message.

2.2.9.  ASAP_ENDPOINT_UNREACHABLE message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x09 |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                     Pool Handle Parameter                     :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                    PE Identifier Parameter                    :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   A PE or PU will send this message to an ENRP server to report the
   unreachability of the specified PE.

2.2.10.  ASAP_SERVER_ANNOUNCE message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x0a |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       Server Identifier                       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                       Transport param #1                      :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                       Transport param #2                      :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                                                               :
   :                             .....                             :
   :                                                               :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                       Transport param #n                      :



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 13]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   This message is sent by an ENRP server such that PUs and PEs know the
   transport layer information necessary to connect to the ENRP server.
   The transport parameters are optional and only TCP and SCTP transport
   parameters are allowed.  Server Identifier field indicates the sender
   ENRP server of the message.

2.2.11.  COOKIE message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x0b |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                         Cookie Parameter                      :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   This message is sent by a PE to a PU.  It may only be sent when a
   control channel exists between the PE and PU.

2.2.12.  ASAP_COOKIE_ECHO message

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x0c |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                         Cookie Parameter                      :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   This message is sent by a PU to a PE in case of a failover.  The
   Cookie Parameter is one received latest from the failed PE.

2.2.13.  BUSINESS_CARD message

   This message is sent by a PU to a PE or from a PE to a PU.  This
   parameter MUST NOT be sent if a control channel does NOT exists
   between the PE and PU.












Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 14]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x0d |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                     Pool Handle Parameter                     :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                   Pool Element Parameter-1                    :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                              ..                               :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                   Pool Element Parameter-N                    :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The sender of this message lists both the Pool that the sender
   belongs to and a preferred list of failover candidates.

2.2.14.  ASAP_ERROR message

   This message is used to report an operational error.  Currently the
   use of this message is undefined, it is reserved for future use
   [Editors Note: we need to come up with concrete uses or get rid of
   the message].


   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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Type = 0x0e |0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|        Message Length         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   :                 Operational Error Parameter                   :
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



















Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 15]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


3.  Procedures

   This section will focus on the methods and procedures used by an
   internal ASAP endpoint.  Appropriate timers and recovery actions for
   failure detection and management are also discussed.

3.1.  Registration

   When a PE wishes to join its server pool it MUST use the procedures
   outlined in this section to register.  Often the registration will be
   triggered by a user request primitive (discussed in Section 4.1).
   The ASAP endpoint MUST register using an SCTP association between the
   ASAP endpoint and the ENRP server.  If the ASAP endpoint has not
   established its Home ENRP server it MUST follow the procedures
   specified in Section 3.6 to establish its Home ENRP server.

   Once the ASAP endpoint has established its Home ENRP server the
   following procedures MUST be followed to register:

   R1) The SCTP endpoint used to communicate with the ENRP server MUST
      be bound to all IP addresses that will be used by the PE
      (irregardless of what protocol will be used to service user
      requests to the PE).

   R2) The ASAP endpoint MUST formulate an ASAP_REGISTRATION message as
      defined in Section 2.2.1 In formulating the message the ASAP
      endpoint MUST:



      R2.1) Fill in the Pool Handle to specify which server pool the
         ASAP endpoint wishes to join.

      R2.2) Fill in a PE identifier using a good quality randomly
         generated number (RFC1750 [10] provides some information on
         randomness guidelines).

      R2.3) Fill in the registration life time parameter with the number
         of seconds that this registration is good for.  Note a PE that
         wishes to continue service MUST re-register after the
         registration expires.

      R2.4) Fill in a User Transport Parameter for the type of transport
         and the data/control channel usage the PE is willing to
         support.  Note, to join an existing server pool, the PE MUST
         follow the overall transport type and overall data/control
         channel usage of the pool.  Otherwise, the registration may be
         rejected by the ENRP server.



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 16]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


      R2.5) Fill in the preferred Member selection policy.

      R2.6) PE does not need to fill in the ASAP transport parameter.
         The ASAP transport TLV will be filled in and used by the home
         ENRP server.

   R3) Send the Registration request to the Home ENRP server using SCTP.

   R4) Start a T2-registration timer.

   If the T2-registration timer expires before receiving an
   ASAP_REGISTRATION_RESPONSE message, or a SEND.FAILURE notification is
   received from the SCTP layer, the ASAP endpoint shall start the
   Server Hunt procedure (see Section 3.6) in an attempt to get service
   from a different ENRP server.  After establishing a new Home ENRP
   server the ASAP endpoint SHOULD restart the registration procedure.

   At the reception of the registration response, the ASAP endpoint MUST
   stop the T2-Registration timer.  If the response indicated success,
   then the PE is now registered and will be considered an available
   member of the server pool.  If the registration response indicates a
   failure, the ASAP endpoint must either re-attempt registration after
   correcting the error or return a failure indication to the ASAP
   endpoints upper layer.  The ASAP endpoint MUST NOT re-attempt
   registration without correcting the error condition.

   At any time a registered PE MAY wish to re-register to either update
   its member selection policy value or registration expiration time.
   When re-registering the PE MUST use the same PE identifier.

   After successful registration the PE MUST start a T4-reregistration
   timer.  At its expiration a re-registration SHOULD be made starting
   at step R1 including (at completion) restarting the T4-reregistration
   timer.

   Note that an implementation SHOULD keep a record of the number of
   registration attempts it makes in a local variable.  If repeated
   registration time-outs or failures occurs and the local count exceeds
   the Threshold 'MAX-REG-ATTEMPT' the implementation SHOULD report the
   error to its upper layer and stop attempting registration.

3.2.  Deregistration

   In the event the PE wishes to deregister from its server pool
   (normally via an upper layer requests see Section 4.2) it SHOULD use
   the following procedures.  Note that an alternate method of
   deregistration is to NOT re-register and to allow the registration
   lift time to expire.



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 17]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   When deregistering the PE SHOULD use the same SCTP association with
   its Home ENRP server that was used for registration.  To deregister
   the ASAP endpoint MUST take the following actions:

   D1) Fill in the Pool Handle parameter of the ASAP_DEREGISTRATION
      message ( Section 2.2.2) using the same Pool Handle parameter sent
      during registration.

   D2) Fill in the PE Identifier.  The identifier MUST be the same one
      used during registration.

   D3) Send the ASAP_DEREGISTRATION message to the Home ENRP server
      using the SCTP association.

   D4) Start a T3-Deregistration timer.

   If the T3-Deregistration timer expires before receiving an
   ASAP_REGISTRATION_RESPONSE message, or a SEND.FAILURE notification is
   received from the SCTP layer, the ASAP endpoint shall start the
   Server Hunt procedure (see Section 3.6) in an attempt to get service
   from a different ENRP server.  After establishing a new Home ENRP
   server the ASAP endpoint SHOULD restart the deregistration procedure.

   At the reception of the deregistration response, the ASAP endpoint
   MUST stop the T3-deregistration timer.

   Note that after a successful deregistration the PE MAY still receive
   requests for some period of time.  The PE MAY wish to still remain
   active and service these requests or may wish to ignore these
   requests and exit.

3.3.  Handle resolution

   At any time a PE or PU may wish to resolve a handle.  This usually
   will occur when a Endpoint sends to a Pool handle ( Section 4.5.1) or
   requests a cache population (Section 4.3) but may occur for other
   reasons (e.g. the internal ASAP PE wishes to know its peers for
   sending a message to all of them).  When an Endpoint (PE or PU)
   wishes to resolve a pool handle it MUST take the following actions:

   NR1) Fill in an ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION message ( Section 2.2.5) with
      the Pool Handle to be resolved.

   NR2) If the endpoint does not have a Home ENRP server start the ENRP
      Server Hunt procedures specified in Section 3.6 to obtain one.
      Otherwise proceed to step NR3.





Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 18]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   NR3) Send the ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION message to the Home ENRP server
      using SCTP.

   NR4) Start a T1-ENRPrequest timer.

   If the T1-ENRPrequest timer expires before receiving a response
   message, the ASAP endpoint SHOULD take the steps described in
   Section 3.7.2.  If a SEND.FAILURE notification is received from the
   SCTP layer, the ASAP endpoint SHOULD start the Server Hunt procedure
   (see Section 3.6) in an attempt to get service from a different ENRP
   server.  After establishing a new Home ENRP server the ASAP endpoint
   SHOULD restart the handle resolution procedure.

   At the reception of the response message (i.e., an
   ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION_RESPONSE) the endpoint MUST stop its T1-
   ENRPrequest timer.  After stopping the T1 timer the endpoint SHOULD
   process the pool handle response as appropriate (e.g. populate a
   local cache, give the response to the ASAP user, and/or use the
   response to send the ASAP users message).

   Note that some ASAP endpoints MAY use a cache to minimize the number
   of handle resolutions made.  If such a cache is used it SHOULD:

   C1) Be consulted before requesting a handle resolution.

   C2) Have a stale timeout time associated with the cache so that even
      in the event of a cache-hit, if the cache is "stale" it will cause
      a new handle resolution to be issued to update the cache.

   C3) In the case of a "stale" cache the implementation may in parallel
      request an update and answer the request or block the user and
      wait for an updated cache before proceeding with the users
      request.

   C4) If the cache is NOT stale, the endpoint SHOULD NOT make a handle
      resolution request but instead use the entry from the cache.

3.4.  Endpoint keep alive

   Periodically an ENRP server may choose to "audit" a PE.  It does this
   by sending an ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE message ( Section 2.2.7).
   Upon reception of an ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE message the following
   actions MUST be taken:








Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 19]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   KA1) The PE must verify that the Pool Handle is correct and matches
      the Pool Handle sent in its earlier ASAP_REGISTRATION.  If the
      Pool Handle does not match silently discard the message.

   KA2) Send an ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE_ACK (Section 2.2.8) by:



      KA2.1) Filling in the Pool Handle Parameter with the PE's Pool
         Handle.

      KA2.2) Fill in the PE Identifier that was used with this PE for
         registration.

      KA2.3) Send off the ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE_ACK message via the
         appropriate SCTP association for that ENRP server.

      KA2.4) If the 'H' flag in the received ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE
         message is set, adopt the sender of the
         ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE message as the new home ENRP server.

3.5.  Reporting unreachable endpoints

   Occasionally an ASAP endpoint may realize that a PE is unreachable.
   This may occur by a specific SCTP error realized by the ASAP endpoint
   or via an ASAP user report via the Transport.Failure Primitive
   (Section 4.9.2).  In either case the ASAP endpoint SHOULD report the
   unavailability of the PE by sending an ASAP_ENDPOINT_UNREACHABLE
   message to its home ENRP server.  The Endpoint should fill in the
   Pool Handle and PE identifier of the unreachable endpoint.  If the
   sender is a PE the message MUST be sent via SCTP to the Endpoints
   Home ENRP server.  Note: an ASAP endpoint MUST report No more than
   once each time it encounters such an event.

   Note: when processing a Transport.Failure Primitive (Section 4.9.2)
   the ASAP endpoint MUST NOT send a unreachable report unless the ASAP
   endpoint has sent at least one message to the PE specified by the
   primitive.

3.6.  ENRP server hunt procedures

   Each PU and PE manages a list of transport addresses of ENRP servers.

   If the multicast capabilities are used an ENRP server MUST send
   periodically every T6-Serverannounce an ASAP_SERVER_ANNOUNCE message
   (Section 2.2.10) including all the transport addresses available for
   ASAP communication to the multicast channel.




Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 20]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   If an ASAP_SERVER_ANNOUNCE message is received by a PU or PE it
   SHOULD insert all new included transport address in its list of ENRP
   server addresses and start a T7-ENRPoutdate timer for each address.
   For all already known addresses the T7-ENRPoutdate timers MUST be
   restarted.  If no transport parameters are included in the
   ASAP_SERVER_ANNOUNCE message the source IP address and the IANA
   registered ASAP port number are used instead.  It is also assumed
   that the transport protocol used is SCTP.  If a T7-ENRP timer for a
   transport address expires the corresponding address is deleted from
   the list of transport addresses.

   If no multicast capabilities are used each PU and PE MUST have a
   configured list of transport addresses of ENRP servers.

   At its startup, or when it fails to send to (i.e., timed-out on a
   service request) with its current home ENRP server, a PE or PU shall
   establish its Home ENRP server, i.e. setup a TCP connection or SCTP
   association with an ENRP server.

   To establish a new association or connection the following rules MUST
   be followed:

   SH1) The PE or PU SHOULD try to establish an association or
      connection with no more than three ENRP server addresses.  An
      endpoint MUST NOT try to establish more than three association or
      connections at any single time.

   SH2) The endpoint shall start a T5-Serverhunt timer.

   SH3) If the endpoint establishes an association or connection it MUST
      stop its T5-Serverhunt timer.  The Endpoint SHOULD also reset the
      T5-Serverhunt value to its initial value and then proceed to step
      SH6.

   SH4) If an association or connection establishment fails the endpoint
      SHOULD try to establish an association or connection by using a
      different transport address.

   SH5) If the T5-Serverhunt timer expires the following should be
      performed:

      SH5.1) The endpoint MUST double the value of the T5-Serverhunt
         timer.

      SH5.2) The endpoint SHOULD stop the establishment of associations
         and connections.





Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 21]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


      SH5.2) The endpoint SHOULD repeat trying to establish an
         association or connection by proceeding to step SH1.  It SHOULD
         attempt to select a different set of transport addresses to
         connect to.

   SH6) The PE or PU shall pick one of the ENRP servers that it was able
      to establish an association or connection with, and send all its
      subsequent the handlespace service requests to this new home ENRP
      server.

3.7.  Handle ASAP to ENRP Communication Failures

   Three types of failure may occur when the ASAP endpoint at an
   endpoint tries to communicate with the ENRP server:

   A) SCTP send failure

   B) T1-ENRPrequest timer expiration

   C) Registration failure

   Registration failure is discussed in Section 3.1

3.7.1.  SCTP Send Failure

   This indicates that the SCTP layer failed to deliver a message sent
   to the ENRP server.  In other words, the ENRP server is currently
   unreachable.

   In such a case, the ASAP endpoint should not re-send the failed
   message.  Instead, it should discard the failed message and start the
   ENRP server hunt procedure as described in Section 3.6

3.7.2.  T1-ENRPrequest Timer Expiration

   When a T1-ENRPrequest timer expires, the ASAP should re-send the
   original request to the ENRP server and re-start the T1-ENRPrequest
   timer.  In parallel, the server hunt procedure should be started as
   outlined in Section 3.6.

   This should be repeated up to 'MAX-REQUEST-RETRANSMIT' times.  After
   that, an Error.Report notification should be generated to inform the
   ASAP user and the ENRP request message associated with the timer
   should be discarded.  Note that if an alternate ENRP server responds
   the ASAP endpoint SHOULD adopt the responding ENRP server as its new
   "home" server and resend the request to the new "home" server.





Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 22]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


3.8.  Cookie handling procedures

   Whenever a PE wants and a control channel exists it can send an
   ASAP_COOKIE Message to the PU via the control channel.  The ASAP
   layer at the PU stores the Cookie parameter and discards an older one
   if it is present.

   If the ASAP layer detects a failure and initiates a failover to a
   different PE, the ASAP layer sends the last received Cookie parameter
   in an ASAP_COOKIE_ECHO message to the new PE.  The upper layer may be
   involved in the failover procedure.

   This cookie mechanism can be used as a simple method for state
   sharing.  Therefore a cookie should be signed by the sending PE and
   this should be verified by the receiving PE.  The details of this are
   out of scope of this document.  It is only important that the PU
   stores always the last received Cookie Parameter and sends that back
   unmodified in case of a PE failure.

3.9.  Business Card handling procedures

   When communication begins between a PU and a PE (i.e. the first
   message is sent from the PU to the PE) the ASAP layer in the PU
   SHOULD send an ASAP_BUSINESS_CARD IF the sender is also registered as
   a PE.  A PE may also send back to a PU a business card as well.  An
   ASAP_BUSINESS_CARD MUST NOT be sent if a control channel does NOT
   exist between the PU and PE.  After communication as been established
   between a PE and PU at any time either entity may update its failover
   distribution by sending a new ASAP_BUSINESS_CARD.

   The business card serves two purposes (for both endpoints PU and PE).
   First it lists the endpoints pool handle.  For a PU contacting a PE
   this is essential so that the PE may also gain the full benefits of
   ASAP if the PU is also a PE.  Secondly the business card tells the
   receiver a failover order that is recommended to follow.  This may
   facilitate rendezvous between PE's as well as some control of load
   redistribution upon the failure of any given PE.

   Upon receipt of an ASAP_BUSINESS_CARD Message (see Section 2.2.13)
   the receiver SHOULD:

   BC1) Unpack the ASAP_BUSINESS_CARD, and if no entry exists in the
      translation cache and one exists, populate the new Pool Handle
      into the cache and request a handle resolution of the pool handle.







Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 23]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   BC2) Create a list for this PE of preferred failover order so that in
      the event of a failure the preferred list will be used to guide
      the ASAP endpoint in the selection of an alternate PE.
















































Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 24]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


4.  The ASAP Interfaces

   This chapter will focus primarily on the primitives and notifications
   that form the interface between the ASAP-user and ASAP and that
   between ASAP and its lower layer transport protocol (e.g., SCTP).

   Note, the following primitive and notification descriptions are shown
   for illustrative purposes.  We believe that including these
   descriptions in this document is important to the understanding of
   the operation of many aspects of ASAP.  But an ASAP implementation is
   not required to use the exact syntax described in this section.

   An ASAP User passes primitives to the ASAP sub-layer to request
   certain actions.  Upon the completion of those actions or upon the
   detection of certain events, the ASAP will notify the ASAP user.

4.1.  Registration.Request Primitive

         Format: registration.request(poolHandle,
                                      User Transport parameter(s))

   The poolHandle parameter contains a NULL terminated ASCII string of
   fixed length.  The optional User Transport parameter(s) indicate
   specific transport parameters and types to register with.  If this
   optional parameter is left off, then the SCTP endpoint used to
   communicate with the ENRP server is used as the default User
   Transport parameter.  Note that any IP address contained within a
   User Transport parameter MUST be a bound IP address in the SCTP
   endpoint used to communicate with the ENRP server.

   The ASAP user invokes this primitive to add itself to the
   handlespace, thus becoming a Pool Element of a pool.  The ASAP user
   must register itself with the ENRP server by using this primitive
   before other ASAP users using the handlespace can send message(s) to
   this ASAP user by Pool Handle or by PE handle (see Section 4.5.1 and
   Section 4.5.3).

   In response to the registration primitive, the ASAP endpoint will
   send an ASAP_REGISTRATION message to the home ENRP server (See
   Section 2.2.1 and Section 3.1), and start a T2-registration timer.

4.2.  Deregistration.Request Primitive

         Format: deregistration.request(poolHandle)

   The ASAP PE invokes this primitive to remove itself from the Server
   Pool.  This should be used as a part of the graceful shutdown process
   by the application.



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 25]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   A ASAP_DEREGISTRATION message will be sent by ASAP endpoint to the
   home ENRP server (see Section 2.2.2 and Section 3.2).

4.3.  Cache.Populate.Request Primitive

          Format: cache.populate.request([Pool-Handle |
                                        Pool-Element-Handle])

   If the address type is a Pool handle and a local handle translation
   cache exists, the ASAP endpoint should initiate a mapping information
   query by sending an ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION message on the Pool handle
   and update it local cache when the response comes back from the ENRP
   server.

   If a Pool-Element-Handle is passed then the Pool Handle is unpacked
   from the Pool-Element-Handle and the ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION message
   is sent to the ENRP server for resolution.  When the response message
   returns from the ENRP server the local cache is updated.

   Note that if the ASAP service does NOT support a local cache this
   primitive performs NO action.

4.4.  Cache.Purge.Request Primitive

      Format: cache.purge.request([Pool-Handle | Pool-Element-Handle])

   If the user passes a Pool handle and local handle translation cache
   exists, the ASAP endpoint should remove the mapping information on
   the Pool handle from its local cache.  If the user passes a Pool-
   Element-Handle then the Pool handle within is used for the
   cache.purge.request.

   Note that if the ASAP service does NOT support a local cache this
   primitive performs NO action.

4.5.  Data.Send.Request Primitive

         Format: data.send.request(destinationAddress, typeOfAddress,
                                   message, sizeOfMessage, Options);

   This primitive requests ASAP to send a message to some specified Pool
   or Pool Element within the current Operational scope.

   Depending on the address type used for the send request, the senders
   ASAP endpoint may perform address translation and Pool Element
   selection before sending the message out.  This also MAY dictate the
   creation of a local transport endpoint in order to meet the required
   transport type.



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 26]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   The data.send.request primitive can take different forms of address
   types as described in the following sections.

4.5.1.  Sending to a Pool Handle

   In this case the destinationAddress and typeOfAddress together
   indicates a pool handle.

   This is the simplest form of send.data.request primitive.  By
   default, this directs ASAP to send the message to one of the Pool
   Elements in the specified pool.

   Before sending the message out to the pool, the senders ASAP endpoint
   MUST first perform a pool handle to address translation.  It may also
   need to perform Pool Element selection if multiple Pool Elements
   exist in the pool.

   If the senders ASAP implementation does not support a local cache of
   the mapping information or if it does not have the mapping
   information on the pool in its local cache, it will transmit a
   ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION message (see Section 2.2.5 and Section 3.3) to
   the current home ENRP server, and MUST hold the outbound message in
   queue while awaiting the response from the ENRP server (any further
   send request to this pool before the ENRP server responds SHOULD also
   be queued).

   Once the necessary mapping information arrives from the ENRP server,
   the senders ASAP will:

   A) map the pool handle into a list of transport addresses of the
      destination PE(s),

   B) if multiple PEs exist in the pool, ASAP will choose one of them
      and transmit the message to it.  In that case, the choice of the
      PE is made by ASAP endpoint of the sender based on the server
      pooling policy as discussed in Section 4.5.2

   C) Optionally create any transport endpoint that may be needed to
      communicate with the PE selected.

   D) if no transport association or connection exists towards the
      destination PE, ASAP will establish any needed transport state,

   E) send out the queued message(s) to the appropriate transport
      connection using the appropriate send mechanism (e.g. for SCTP the
      SEND primitive in RFC2960 [4] would be used), and,





Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 27]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   F) if the local cache is implemented, append/update the local cache
      with the mapping information received in the ENRP server's
      response.  Also, record the local transport information (e.g. the
      SCTP association id) if any new transport state was created.

   For more on the ENRP server request procedures see ENRP [7].

   Optionally, the ASAP endpoint of the sender may return a Pool Element
   handle of the selected PE to the application after sending the
   message.  This PE handle can then be used for future transmissions to
   that same PE (see Section 4.5.3).

   Section 3.7 defines the fail-over procedures for cases where the
   selected PE is found unreachable.

4.5.2.  Pool Element Selection

   Each time an ASAP user sends a message to a pool that contains more
   than one PE, the senders ASAP endpoint must select one of the PEs in
   the pool as the receiver of the current message.  The selection is
   done according to the current server pooling policy of the pool to
   which the message is sent.

   Note, no selection is needed if the ASAP_SEND_TOALL option is set
   (see Section 4.5.5).

   Together with the server pooling policy, each PE can also specify a
   Policy Value for itself at the registration time.  The meaning of the
   policy value depends on the current server pooling policy of the
   group.  A PE can also change its policy value whenever it desires, by
   re-registering itself with the handlespace with a new policy value.
   Re-registration shall be done by simply sending another
   ASAP_REGISTRATION to its home ENRP server (See Section 2.2.1).

   Four basic server pooling policies are defined in ASAP, namely the
   Round Robin, Least Used, Least Used Degrading and Weighted Round
   Robin.  The following sections describes each of these policies.

4.5.2.1.  Round Robin Policy

   When an ASAP endpoint sends messages by Pool Handle and Round-Robin
   is the current policy of that Pool, the ASAP endpoint of the sender
   will select the receiver for each outbound message by round-Robining
   through all the registered PEs in that Pool, in an attempt to achieve
   an even distribution of outbound messages.  Note that in a large
   server pool, the ENRP server MAY NOT send back all PEs to the ASAP
   client.  In this case the client or PU will be performing a round
   robin policy on a subset of the entire Pool.



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 28]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


4.5.2.2.  Least Used Policy

   When the destination Pool is under the Least Used server pooling
   policy, the ASAP endpoint of the message sender will select the PE
   that has the lowest policy value in the group as the receiver of the
   current message.  If more than one PE from the group share the same
   lowest policy value, the selection will be done round Robin amongst
   those PEs.

   It is important to note that this policy means that the same PE will
   be always selected as the message receiver by the sender until the
   load control information of the pool is updated and changed in the
   local cache of the sender (via a cache update see Section 3.3).

4.5.2.3.  Least Used with Degradation Policy

   This policy is the same as the Least Used policy with the exception
   that, each time the PE with the lowest policy value is selected from
   the Pool as the receiver of the current message, its policy value is
   incremented, and thus it may no longer be the lowest value in the
   Pool.

   This provides a degradation of the policy towards round Robin policy
   over time.  As with the Least Used policy, every local cache update
   at the sender will bring the policy back to Least Used with
   Degradation.

4.5.2.4.  Weighted Round Robin Policy

   [TBD]

4.5.3.  Sending to a Pool Element Handle

   In this case the destinationAddress and typeOfAddress together
   indicate an ASAP Pool Element handle.

   This requests the ASAP endpoint to deliver the message to the PE
   identified by the Pool Element handle.

   The Pool Element handle should contain the Pool Handle and a
   destination transport address of the destination PE or the Pool
   Handle and the transport type.  Other implementation dependant
   elements may also be cached in a Pool Element handle.

   The ASAP endpoint shall use the transport address and transport type
   to identify the endpoint to communicate with.  If no communication
   state exists with the peer endpoint (and is required by the transport
   protocol) the ASAP endpoint MAY setup the needed state and then



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 29]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   invoke the SEND primitive for the particular transport protocol to
   send the message to the PE.

   In addition, if a local translation cache is supported the endpoint
   will:

   A) send out the message to the transport address (or association id)
      designated by the PE handle.

   B) determine if the Pool Handle is in the local cache.

      If it is NOT, the endpoint will:



      i) ask the home ENRP server for handle resolution on pool handle
         by sending an ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION message (see
         Section 2.2.5), and

      ii) use the response to update the local cache.

         If the pool handle is in the cache, the endpoint will only
         update the pool handle if the cache is stale.  A stale cache is
         indicated by it being older than the protocol parameter
         'stale.cache.value' (see Section 5.2).

   Section 3.5 and Section 4.9 defines the fail-over procedures for
   cases where the PE pointed to by the Pool Element handle is found
   unreachable.

   Optionally, the ASAP endpoint may return the actual Pool Element
   handle to which the message was sent (this may be different from the
   Pool Element handle specified when the primitive is invoked, due to
   the possibility of automatic fail-over).

4.5.4.  Send by Transport Address

   In this case the destinationAddress and typeOfAddress together
   indicate a transport address and transport type.

   This directs the senders ASAP endpoint to send the message out to the
   specified transport address.

   No endpoint fail-over is support when this form of send request is
   used.  This form of send request effectively by-passes the ASAP
   endpoint.





Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 30]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


4.5.5.  Message Delivery Options

   The Options parameter passed in the various forms of the above
   data.send.request primitive gives directions to the senders ASAP
   endpoint on special handling of the message delivery.

   The value of the Options parameter is generated by bit-wise "OR"ing
   of the following pre-defined constants:

   ASAP_USE_DEFAULT: 0x0000 Use default setting.

   ASAP_SEND_FAILOVER: 0x0001 Enables PE fail-over on this message.  In
      case where the first selected PE or the PE pointed to by the PE
      handle is found unreachable, the sender's ASAP endpoint SHOULD re-
      select an alternate PE from the same pool if one exists, and
      silently re-send the message to this newly selected endpoint.

      Note that this is a best-effort service.  Applications should be
      aware that messages can be lost during the failover process, even
      if the underlying transport supports retrieval of unacknowledged
      data (e.g.  SCTP) (Example: messages acknowledged by the SCTP
      layer at a PE, but not yet read by the PE when a PE failure
      occurs.)  In the case where the underlying transport does not
      support such retrieval (e.g.  TCP), any data already submitted by
      ASAP to the transport layer MAY be lost upon failover.

   ASAP_SEND_NO_FAILOVER: 0x0002 This option prohibits the senders ASAP
      endpoint from re-sending the message to any alternate PE in case
      that the first selected PE or the PE pointed to by the PE handle
      is found unreachable.  Instead, the senders ASAP endpoint shall
      notify its upper layer about the unreachability with an
      Error.Report and return any unsent data.

   ASAP_SEND_TO_LAST: 0x0004 This option requests the senders ASAP
      endpoint to send the message to the same PE in the pool that the
      previous message destined to this pool was sent to.

   ASAP_SEND_TO_ALL: 0x0008 When sending by Pool Handle, this option
      directs the senders ASAP endpoint to send a copy of the message to
      all the PEs, except for the sender itself if the sender is a PE,
      in that pool.

   ASAP_SEND_TO_SELF: 0x0010 This option only applies in combination
      with ASAP_SEND_TO_ALL option.  It permits the senders ASAP
      endpoint also deliver a copy of the message to itself if the
      sender is a PE of the pool (i.e., loop-back).





Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 31]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   ASAP_SCTP_UNORDER: 0x1000 This option requests the transport layer to
      send the current message using un-ordered delivery (note the
      underlying transport must support un-ordered delivery for this
      option to be effective).

4.6.  Data.Received Notification

         Format: data.received(messageReceived, sizeOfMessage,
                               senderAddress, typeOfAddress)

   When a new user message is received, the ASAP endpoint of the
   receiver uses this notification to pass the message to its upper
   layer.

   Along with the message being passed, the ASAP endpoint of the
   receiver should also indicate to its upper layer the message senders
   address.  The senders address can be in the form of either an SCTP
   association id, TCP transport address, UDP transport address, or an
   ASAP Pool Element handle.

   A) If the handle translation local cache is implemented at the
      receiver's ASAP endpoint, a reverse mapping from the senders IP
      address to the pool handle should be performed and if the mapping
      is successful, the senders ASAP Pool Element handle should be
      constructed and passed in the senderAddress field.

   B) If there is no local cache or the reverse mapping is not
      successful, the SCTP association id or other transport specific
      identification (if SCTP is not being used) should be passed in the
      senderAddress field.

4.7.  Error.Report Notification


         Format: error.report(destinationAddress, typeOfAddress,
                              failedMessage, sizeOfMessage)

   An error.report should be generated to notify the ASAP user about
   failed message delivery as well as other abnormalities.

   The destinationAddress and typeOfAddress together indicates to whom
   the message was originally sent.  The address type can be either a
   ASAP Pool Element handle, association id, or a transport address.

   The original message (or the first portion of it if the message is
   too big) and its size should be passed in the failedMessage and
   sizeOfMessage fields, respectively.




Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 32]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


4.8.  Examples

   These examples assume an underlying SCTP transport between the PE and
   PU.  Other transports are possible but SCTP is utilized in the
   examples for illustrative purposes.  Note that all communication
   between PU and ENRP server and PE and ENRP servers would be using
   SCTP.

4.8.1.  Send to a New Pool

   This example shows the event sequence when a Pool User sends the
   message "hello" to a pool which is not in the local translation cache
   (assuming local caching is supported).


     ENRP Server                       PU         new-handle:PEx

       |                                |                 |
       |                              +---+               |
       |                              | 1 |               |
       |2. ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION     +---+               |
       |<-------------------------------|                 |
       |                              +---+               |
       |                              | 3 |               |
       |4. ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION_RSP +---+               |
       |------------------------------->|                 |
       |                              +---+               |
       |                              | 5 |               |
       |                              +---+  6. "hello1"  |
       |                                |---------------->|
       |                                |                 |


   1) The user at PU invokes:

      data.send.request("new-handle", handle-type, "hello1", 6, 0);

      The ASAP endpoint, in response, looks up the pool "new-handle" in
      its local cache but fails to find it.

   2) The ASAP endpoint of PU queues the message, and sends an
      ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION request to the ENRP server asking for all
      information about pool "new-handle".

   3) A T1-ENRPrequest timer is started while the ASAP endpoint is
      waiting for the response from the ENRP server.





Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 33]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   4) The ENRP Server responds to the query with an
      ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION_REPONSE message that contains all the
      information about pool "new-handle".

   5) ASAP at PU cancels the T1-ENRPrequest timer and populate its local
      cache with information on pool "new-handle".

   6) Based on the server pooling policy of pool "new-handle", ASAP at
      PU selects the destination PE (PEx), sets up, if necessary, an
      SCTP association towards PEx (explicitly or implicitly), and send
      out the queued "hello1" user message.

4.8.2.  Send to a Cached Pool Handle

   This shows the event sequence when the ASAP user PU sends another
   message to the pool "new-handle" after what happened in
   Section 4.8.1.


     ENRP Server                       PU         new-handle:PEx

       |                                |                 |
       |                              +---+               |
       |                              | 1 |               |
       |                              +---+  2. "hello2"  |
       |                                |---------------->|
       |                                |                 |


   1) The user at PU invokes:

      pdata.send.request("new-handle", handle-type, "hello2", 6, 0);

      The ASAP endpoint, in response, looks up the pool "new-handle" in
      its local cache and find the mapping information.

   2) Based on the server pooling policy of "new-handle", ASAP at PU
      selects the PE (assume EPx is selected again), and sends out
      "hello2" message (assume the SCTP association is already set up).

4.9.  PE send failure

   When the ASAP endpoint in a PE or PU attempts to send a message to a
   PE and fails the failed sender will report the event as described in
   Section 3.5 .

   Additional primitive are also defined in this section to support
   those user applications that do not wish to use ASAP as the actual



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 34]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   transport.

4.9.1.  Translation.Request Primitive

           Format: translation.request(Pool-Handle)

   If the address type is a Pool handle and a local handle translation
   cache exists, the ASAP endpoint should look within its translation
   cache and return the current known transport types, ports and
   addresses to the caller.

   If the Pool handle does not exist in the local handle cache or no
   handle cache exists, the ASAP endpoint will send an
   ASAP_HANDLE_RESOLUTION request using the Pool handle.  Upon
   completion of the handle resolution, the ASAP endpoint should
   populate the local handle cache (if a local handle cache is
   supported) and return the transport types, ports and addresses to the
   caller.

4.9.2.  Transport.Failure Primitive

       Format: transport.failure(Pool-Handle, Transport-address)

   If an external user encounters a failure in sending to a PE and is
   NOT using ASAP it can use this primitive to report the failure to the
   ASAP endpoint.  ASAP will send an ASAP_ENDPOINT_UNREACHABLE to the
   "home" ENRP server in response to this primitive.  Note ASAP SHOULD
   NOT send a ASAP_ENDPOINT_UNREACHABLE UNLESS the user has actually
   made a previous request to send data to the PE.






















Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 35]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


5.  Timers, Variables, and Thresholds

   The following is a summary of the timers, variables, and pre-set
   protocol constants used in ASAP.

5.1.  Timers

   T1-ENRPrequest - A timer started when a request is sent by ASAP to
      the ENRP server (providing application information is queued).
      Normally set to 15 seconds.

   T2-registration - A timer started when sending an ASAP_REGISTRATION
      request to the home ENRP server, normally set to 30 seconds.

   T3-deregistration - A timer started when sending a deregistration
      request to the home ENRP server, normally set to 30 seconds.

   T4-reregistration - This timer is started after successful
      registration into the ASAP handle space and is used to cause a re-
      registration at a periodic interval.  This timer is normally set
      to 10 minutes or 20 seconds less than the Life Timer parameter
      used in the registration request (whichever is less).

   T5-Serverhunt - This timer is used during the ENRP server hunt
      procedure and is normally set to 120 seconds.

   T6-Serverannounce - This timer gives the time between the sending of
      consecutive ASAP_SERVER_ANNOUNCE messages.  It is normally set to
      1 second.

   T7-ENRPoutdate - This timer gives the time a server announcement is
      valid.  It is normally set to 5 seconds.

5.2.  Variables

   stale.cache.value - A threshold variable that indicates how long a
      cache entry is valid for.

5.3.  Thresholds

   MAX-REG-ATTEMPT - The maximum number of registration attempts to be
      made before a server hunt is issued.

   MAX-REQUEST-RETRANSMIT - The maximum number of attempts to be made
      when requesting information from the local ENRP server before a
      server hunt is issued.





Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 36]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


6.  Security Considerations

   Threats Introduced by Rserpool and Requirements for Security in
   Response to Threats [8] describes the threats to the Rserpool
   architecture in detail and lists the security requirements in
   response to each threat.  From the threats described in this
   document, the security services required for the Rserpool protocol
   are enumerated below.

   Threat 1) PE registration/deregistration flooding or spoofing
   -----------
   Security mechanism in response: ENRP server authenticates the PE

   Threat 2) PE registers with a malicious ENRP server
   -----------
   Security mechanism in response: PE authenticates the ENRP server

   Threat 1 and 2 taken together results in mutual authentication of the
   ENRP server and the PE.

   Threat 3) Malicious ENRP server joins the ENRP server pool
   -----------
   Security mechanism in response: ENRP servers mutually authenticate

   Threat 4) A PU communicates with a malicious ENRP server for handle
   resolution
   -----------
   Security mechanism in response: The PU authenticates the ENRP server

   Threat 5) Replay attack
   -----------
   Security mechanism in response: Security protocol which has
   protection from replay attacks

   Threat 6) Corrupted data which causes a PU to have misinformation
   concerning a pool handle resolution
   -----------
   Security mechanism in response: Security protocol which supports
   integrity protection

   Threat 7) Eavesdropper snooping on handlespace information
   -----------
   Security mechanism in response: Security protocol which supports data
   confidentiality

   Threat 8) Flood of ASAP Endpoint_Unreachable messages from the PU to
   ENRP server
   -----------



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 37]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   Security mechanism in response: ASAP must control the number of ASAP
   endpoint unreachable messages transmitted from the PU to the ENRP
   server.

   Threat 9) Flood of ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE messages to the PE from
   the ENRP server
   -----------
   Security mechanism in response: ENRP server must control the number
   of ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_AlIVE messages to the PE

   To summarize the threats 1-7 require security mechanisms which
   support authentication, integrity, data confidentiality, protection
   from replay attacks.

   For Rserpool we need to authenticate the following:

      PU <----  ENRP Server (PU authenticates the ENRP server)
      PE <----> ENRP Server (mutual authentication)
      ENRP server <-----> ENRP Server (mutual authentication)

   We do not define any new security mechanisms specifically for
   responding to threats 1-7.  Rather we use existing IETF security
   protocols to provide the security services required.  TLS supports
   all these requirements and MUST be implemented.  The
   TLS_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA ciphersuite MUST be supported at a
   minimum by implementers of TLS for Rserpool.  For purposes of
   backwards compatibility, ENRP SHOULD support
   TLS_RSA_WITH_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA.  Implementers MAY also support any
   other ciphersuite.

   Threat 8 requires the ASAP protocol to limit the number of ASAP
   Endpoint_Unreachable messages (see Section 3.5) to the ENRP server.

   Threat 9 requires the ENRP protocol to limit the number of
   ASAP_ENDPOINT_KEEP_ALIVE messages to the PE (see section x.y??? in
   [7]).

6.1.  Implementing Security Mechanisms

   ENRP servers, PEs, PUs MUST implement TLS.  ENRP servers and PEs must
   support mutual authentication.  ENRP servers must support mutual
   authentication among themselves.  PUs MUST authenticate ENRP servers.

   ENRP servers and PEs SHOULD possess a site certificate whose subject
   corresponds to their canonical hostname.  PUs MAY have certificates
   of their own for mutual authentication with TLS, but no provisions
   are set forth in this document for their use.  All Rserpool elements
   that support TLS MUST have a mechanism for validating certificates



Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 38]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


   received during TLS negotiation; this entails possession of one or
   more root certificates issued by certificate authorities (preferably
   well-known distributors of site certificates comparable to those that
   issue root certificates for web browsers).

   Implementations MUST support TLS with SCTP as described in RFC3436
   [9] or TLS over TCP as described in RFC2246 [3].  When using TLS/SCTP
   we must ensure that RSerPool does not use any features of SCTP that
   are not available to an TLS/SCTP user.  This is not a difficult
   technical problem, but simply a requirement.  When describing an API
   of the RSerPool lower layer we have also to take into account the
   differences between TLS and SCTP.







































Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 39]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


7.  Acknowledgments

   The authors wish to thank John Loughney, Lyndon Ong, Walter Johnson,
   Thomas Dreibholz, and many others for their invaluable comments and
   feedback.














































Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 40]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

   [1]  Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3",
        BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996.

   [2]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
        Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [3]  Dierks, T. and C. Allen, "The TLS Protocol Version 1.0",
        RFC 2246, January 1999.

   [4]  Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Morneault, K., Sharp, C., Schwarzbauer,
        H., Taylor, T., Rytina, I., Kalla, M., Zhang, L., and V. Paxson,
        "Stream Control Transmission Protocol", RFC 2960, October 2000.

   [5]  Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Stillman, M., and M. Tuexen, "Aggregate
        Server Access Protocol (ASAP) and Endpoint Handlespace
        Redundancy Protocol (ENRP) Parameters",
        draft-ietf-rserpool-common-param-09 (work in progress),
        July 2005.

   [6]  Tuexen, M., Xie, Q., Stewart, R., Shore, M., Loughney, J., and
        A. Silverton, "Architecture for Reliable Server Pooling",
        draft-ietf-rserpool-arch-10 (work in progress), July 2005.

   [7]  Xie, Q., Stewart, R., Stillman, M., Tuexen, M., and A.
        Silverton, "Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol (ENRP)",
        draft-ietf-rserpool-enrp-12 (work in progress), July 2005.

   [8]  Stillman, M., Gopal, R., Sengodan, S., Guttman, E., and M.
        Holdrege, "Threats Introduced by Rserpool and Requirements for
        Security in Response to Threats", draft-ietf-rserpool-threats-05
        (work in progress), July 2005.

   [9]  Jungmaier, A., Rescorla, E., and M. Tuexen, "TLS over SCTP",
        RFC 3436, December 2002.

8.2.  Informational References (non-normative)

   [10]  Eastlake, D., Crocker, S., and J. Schiller, "Randomness
         Recommendations for Security", RFC 1750, December 1994.








Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 41]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


Authors' Addresses

   Randall R. Stewart
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   4875 Forest Drive
   Suite 200
   Columbia, SC  29206
   USA

   Phone:
   Email: rrs@cisco.com


   Qiaobing Xie
   Motorola, Inc.
   1501 W. Shure Drive, #2309
   Arlington Heights, IL  60004
   USA

   Phone:
   Email: qxie1@email.mot.com


   Maureen Stillman
   Nokia
   127 W. State Street
   Ithaca, NY  14850
   USA

   Phone:
   Email: maureen.stillman@nokia.com


   Michael Tuexen
   Muenster Univ. of Applied Sciences
   Stegerwaldstr. 39
   48565 Steinfurt
   Germany

   Email: tuexen@fh-muenster.de











Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 42]

Internet-Draft      Aggregate Server Access Protocol       February 2006


Intellectual Property Statement

   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.


Disclaimer of Validity

   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 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.


Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).  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.


Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.




Stewart, et al.          Expires August 11, 2006               [Page 43]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.107, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/