[Docs] [txt|pdf] [draft-ietf-manet-...] [Diff1] [Diff2]

EXPERIMENTAL

Network Working Group                                         C. Perkins
Request for Comments: 3561                         Nokia Research Center
Category: Experimental                                  E. Belding-Royer
                                 University of California, Santa Barbara
                                                                  S. Das
                                                University of Cincinnati
                                                               July 2003


            Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing

Status of this Memo

   This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet
   community.  It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind.
   Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested.
   Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   The Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) routing protocol is
   intended for use by mobile nodes in an ad hoc network.  It offers
   quick adaptation to dynamic link conditions, low processing and
   memory overhead, low network utilization, and determines unicast
   routes to destinations within the ad hoc network.  It uses
   destination sequence numbers to ensure loop freedom at all times
   (even in the face of anomalous delivery of routing control messages),
   avoiding problems (such as "counting to infinity") associated with
   classical distance vector protocols.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction ...............................................  2
   2.  Overview  ..................................................  3
   3.  AODV Terminology ...........................................  4
   4.  Applicability Statement ....................................  6
   5.  Message Formats ............................................  7
       5.1. Route Request (RREQ) Message Format ...................  7
       5.2. Route Reply (RREP) Message Format .....................  8
       5.3. Route Error (RERR) Message Format ..................... 10
       5.4. Route Reply Acknowledgment (RREP-ACK) Message Format .. 11
   6.  AODV Operation ............................................. 11
       6.1. Maintaining Sequence Numbers .......................... 11
       6.2. Route Table Entries and Precursor Lists ............... 13



Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                      [Page 1]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


       6.3. Generating Route Requests ............................. 14
       6.4. Controlling Dissemination of Route Request Messages ... 15
       6.5. Processing and Forwarding Route Requests .............. 16
       6.6. Generating Route Replies .............................. 18
            6.6.1. Route Reply Generation by the Destination ...... 18
            6.6.2. Route Reply Generation by an Intermediate
                   Node ........................................... 19
            6.6.3. Generating Gratuitous RREPs .................... 19
       6.7. Receiving and Forwarding Route Replies ................ 20
       6.8. Operation over Unidirectional Links ................... 21
       6.9. Hello Messages ........................................ 22
       6.10 Maintaining Local Connectivity ........................ 23
       6.11 Route Error (RERR) Messages, Route Expiry and Route
            Deletion .............................................. 24
       6.12 Local Repair .......................................... 26
       6.13 Actions After Reboot  ................................. 27
       6.14 Interfaces ............................................ 28
   7.  AODV and Aggregated Networks ............................... 28
   8.  Using AODV with Other Networks ............................. 29
   9.  Extensions ................................................. 30
       9.1. Hello Interval Extension Format ....................... 30
   10. Configuration Parameters ................................... 31
   11. Security Considerations .................................... 33
   12. IANA Considerations ........................................ 34
   13. IPv6 Considerations ........................................ 34
   14. Acknowledgments ............................................ 34
   15. Normative References ....................................... 35
   16. Informative References ..................................... 35
   17. Authors' Addresses ......................................... 36
   18. Full Copyright Statement ................................... 37

1. Introduction

   The Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) algorithm enables
   dynamic, self-starting, multihop routing between participating mobile
   nodes wishing to establish and maintain an ad hoc network.  AODV
   allows mobile nodes to obtain routes quickly for new destinations,
   and does not require nodes to maintain routes to destinations that
   are not in active communication.  AODV allows mobile nodes to respond
   to link breakages and changes in network topology in a timely manner.
   The operation of AODV is loop-free, and by avoiding the Bellman-Ford
   "counting to infinity" problem offers quick convergence when the ad
   hoc network topology changes (typically, when a node moves in the
   network).  When links break, AODV causes the affected set of nodes to
   be notified so that they are able to invalidate the routes using the
   lost link.





Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                      [Page 2]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   One distinguishing feature of AODV is its use of a destination
   sequence number for each route entry.  The destination sequence
   number is created by the destination to be included along with any
   route information it sends to requesting nodes.  Using destination
   sequence numbers ensures loop freedom and is simple to program.
   Given the choice between two routes to a destination, a requesting
   node is required to select the one with the greatest sequence number.

2. Overview

   Route Requests (RREQs), Route Replies (RREPs), and Route Errors
   (RERRs) are the message types defined by AODV.  These message types
   are received via UDP, and normal IP header processing applies. So,
   for instance, the requesting node is expected to use its IP address
   as the Originator IP address for the messages.  For broadcast
   messages, the IP limited broadcast address (255.255.255.255) is used.
   This means that such messages are not blindly forwarded.  However,
   AODV operation does require certain messages (e.g., RREQ) to be
   disseminated widely, perhaps throughout the ad hoc network.  The
   range of dissemination of such RREQs is indicated by the TTL in the
   IP header.  Fragmentation is typically not required.

   As long as the endpoints of a communication connection have valid
   routes to each other, AODV does not play any role.  When a route to a
   new destination is needed, the node broadcasts a RREQ to find a route
   to the destination.  A route can be determined when the RREQ reaches
   either the destination itself, or an intermediate node with a 'fresh
   enough' route to the destination.  A 'fresh enough' route is a valid
   route entry for the destination whose associated sequence number is
   at least as great as that contained in the RREQ.  The route is made
   available by unicasting a RREP back to the origination of the RREQ.
   Each node receiving the request caches a route back to the originator
   of the request, so that the RREP can be unicast from the destination
   along a path to that originator, or likewise from any intermediate
   node that is able to satisfy the request.

   Nodes monitor the link status of next hops in active routes.  When a
   link break in an active route is detected, a RERR message is used to
   notify other nodes that the loss of that link has occurred.  The RERR
   message indicates those destinations (possibly subnets) which are no
   longer reachable by way of the broken link.  In order to enable this
   reporting mechanism, each node keeps a "precursor list", containing
   the IP address for each its neighbors that are likely to use it as a
   next hop towards each destination.  The information in the precursor
   lists is most easily acquired during the processing for generation of
   a RREP message, which by definition has to be sent to a node in a
   precursor list (see section 6.6).  If the RREP has a nonzero prefix




Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                      [Page 3]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   length, then the originator of the RREQ which solicited the RREP
   information is included among the precursors for the subnet route
   (not specifically for the particular destination).

   A RREQ may also be received for a multicast IP address.  In this
   document, full processing for such messages is not specified.  For
   example, the originator of such a RREQ for a multicast IP address may
   have to follow special rules.  However, it is important to enable
   correct multicast operation by intermediate nodes that are not
   enabled as originating or destination nodes for IP multicast
   addresses, and likewise are not equipped for any special multicast
   protocol processing.  For such multicast-unaware nodes, processing
   for a multicast IP address as a destination IP address MUST be
   carried out in the same way as for any other destination IP address.

   AODV is a routing protocol, and it deals with route table management.
   Route table information must be kept even for short-lived routes,
   such as are created to temporarily store reverse paths towards nodes
   originating RREQs.  AODV uses the following fields with each route
   table entry:

   -  Destination IP Address
   -  Destination Sequence Number
   -  Valid Destination Sequence Number flag
   -  Other state and routing flags (e.g., valid, invalid, repairable,
      being repaired)
   -  Network Interface
   -  Hop Count (number of hops needed to reach destination)
   -  Next Hop
   -  List of Precursors (described in Section 6.2)
   -  Lifetime (expiration or deletion time of the route)

   Managing the sequence number is crucial to avoiding routing loops,
   even when links break and a node is no longer reachable to supply its
   own information about its sequence number.  A destination becomes
   unreachable when a link breaks or is deactivated.  When these
   conditions occur, the route is invalidated by operations involving
   the sequence number and marking the route table entry state as
   invalid.  See section 6.1 for details.

3. AODV Terminology

   This protocol specification uses conventional meanings [1] for
   capitalized words such as MUST, SHOULD, etc., to indicate requirement
   levels for various protocol features.  This section defines other
   terminology used with AODV that is not already defined in [3].





Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                      [Page 4]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


      active route

         A route towards a destination that has a routing table entry
         that is marked as valid.  Only active routes can be used to
         forward data packets.

      broadcast

         Broadcasting means transmitting to the IP Limited Broadcast
         address, 255.255.255.255.  A broadcast packet may not be
         blindly forwarded, but broadcasting is useful to enable
         dissemination of AODV messages throughout the ad hoc network.

      destination

         An IP address to which data packets are to be transmitted.
         Same as "destination node".  A node knows it is the destination
         node for a typical data packet when its address appears in the
         appropriate field of the IP header.  Routes for destination
         nodes are supplied by action of the AODV protocol, which
         carries the IP address of the desired destination node in route
         discovery messages.

      forwarding node

         A node that agrees to forward packets destined for another
         node, by retransmitting them to a next hop that is closer to
         the unicast destination along a path that has been set up using
         routing control messages.

      forward route

         A route set up to send data packets from a node originating a
         Route Discovery operation towards its desired destination.

      invalid route

         A route that has expired, denoted by a state of invalid in the
         routing table entry.  An invalid route is used to store
         previously valid route information for an extended period of
         time.  An invalid route cannot be used to forward data packets,
         but it can provide information useful for route repairs, and
         also for future RREQ messages.








Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                      [Page 5]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


      originating node

         A node that initiates an AODV route discovery message to be
         processed and possibly retransmitted by other nodes in the ad
         hoc network.  For instance, the node initiating a Route
         Discovery process and broadcasting the RREQ message is called
         the originating node of the RREQ message.

      reverse route

         A route set up to forward a reply (RREP) packet back to the
         originator from the destination or from an intermediate node
         having a route to the destination.

      sequence number

         A monotonically increasing number maintained by each
         originating node.  In AODV routing protocol messages, it is
         used by other nodes to determine the freshness of the
         information contained from the originating node.

      valid route

         See active route.

4. Applicability Statement

   The AODV routing protocol is designed for mobile ad hoc networks with
   populations of tens to thousands of mobile nodes.  AODV can handle
   low, moderate, and relatively high mobility rates, as well as a
   variety of data traffic levels.  AODV is designed for use in networks
   where the nodes can all trust each other, either by use of
   preconfigured keys, or because it is known that there are no
   malicious intruder nodes.  AODV has been designed to reduce the
   dissemination of control traffic and eliminate overhead on data
   traffic, in order to improve scalability and performance.















Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                      [Page 6]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


5. Message Formats

5.1. Route Request (RREQ) Message 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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     Type      |J|R|G|D|U|   Reserved          |   Hop Count   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                            RREQ ID                            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                    Destination IP Address                     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                  Destination Sequence Number                  |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                    Originator IP Address                      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                  Originator Sequence Number                   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The format of the Route Request message is illustrated above, and
   contains the following fields:

      Type           1

      J              Join flag; reserved for multicast.

      R              Repair flag; reserved for multicast.

      G              Gratuitous RREP flag; indicates whether a
                     gratuitous RREP should be unicast to the node
                     specified in the Destination IP Address field (see
                     sections 6.3, 6.6.3).

      D              Destination only flag; indicates only the
                     destination may respond to this RREQ (see
                     section 6.5).

      U              Unknown sequence number; indicates the destination
                     sequence number is unknown (see section 6.3).

      Reserved       Sent as 0; ignored on reception.

      Hop Count      The number of hops from the Originator IP Address
                     to the node handling the request.






Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                      [Page 7]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


      RREQ ID        A sequence number uniquely identifying the
                     particular RREQ when taken in conjunction with the
                     originating node's IP address.

      Destination IP Address
                     The IP address of the destination for which a route
                     is desired.

      Destination Sequence Number
                     The latest sequence number received in the past
                     by the originator for any route towards the
                     destination.

      Originator IP Address
                     The IP address of the node which originated the
                     Route Request.

      Originator Sequence Number
                     The current sequence number to be used in the route
                     entry pointing towards the originator of the route
                     request.

5.2. Route Reply (RREP) Message 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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     Type      |R|A|    Reserved     |Prefix Sz|   Hop Count   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                     Destination IP address                    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                  Destination Sequence Number                  |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                    Originator IP address                      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           Lifetime                            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The format of the Route Reply message is illustrated above, and
   contains the following fields:

      Type          2

      R             Repair flag; used for multicast.

      A             Acknowledgment required; see sections 5.4 and 6.7.

      Reserved      Sent as 0; ignored on reception.



Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                      [Page 8]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


      Prefix Size   If nonzero, the 5-bit Prefix Size specifies that the
                    indicated next hop may be used for any nodes with
                    the same routing prefix (as defined by the Prefix
                    Size) as the requested destination.

      Hop Count     The number of hops from the Originator IP Address
                    to the Destination IP Address.  For multicast route
                    requests this indicates the number of hops to the
                    multicast tree member sending the RREP.

      Destination IP Address
                    The IP address of the destination for which a route
                    is supplied.

      Destination Sequence Number
                    The destination sequence number associated to the
                    route.

      Originator IP Address
                    The IP address of the node which originated the RREQ
                    for which the route is supplied.

      Lifetime      The time in milliseconds for which nodes receiving
                    the RREP consider the route to be valid.

   Note that the Prefix Size allows a subnet router to supply a route
   for every host in the subnet defined by the routing prefix, which is
   determined by the IP address of the subnet router and the Prefix
   Size.  In order to make use of this feature, the subnet router has to
   guarantee reachability to all the hosts sharing the indicated subnet
   prefix.  See section 7 for details.  When the prefix size is nonzero,
   any routing information (and precursor data) MUST be kept with
   respect to the subnet route, not the individual destination IP
   address on that subnet.

   The 'A' bit is used when the link over which the RREP message is sent
   may be unreliable or unidirectional.  When the RREP message contains
   the 'A' bit set, the receiver of the RREP is expected to return a
   RREP-ACK message.  See section 6.8.












Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                      [Page 9]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


5.3. Route Error (RERR) Message 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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     Type      |N|          Reserved           |   DestCount   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Unreachable Destination IP Address (1)             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |         Unreachable Destination Sequence Number (1)           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-|
   |  Additional Unreachable Destination IP Addresses (if needed)  |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |Additional Unreachable Destination Sequence Numbers (if needed)|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The format of the Route Error message is illustrated above, and
   contains the following fields:

      Type        3

      N           No delete flag; set when a node has performed a local
                  repair of a link, and upstream nodes should not delete
                  the route.

      Reserved    Sent as 0; ignored on reception.

      DestCount   The number of unreachable destinations included in the
                  message; MUST be at least 1.

      Unreachable Destination IP Address
                  The IP address of the destination that has become
                  unreachable due to a link break.

      Unreachable Destination Sequence Number
                  The sequence number in the route table entry for
                  the destination listed in the previous Unreachable
                  Destination IP Address field.

   The RERR message is sent whenever a link break causes one or more
   destinations to become unreachable from some of the node's neighbors.
   See section 6.2 for information about how to maintain the appropriate
   records for this determination, and section 6.11 for specification
   about how to create the list of destinations.







Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 10]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


5.4. Route Reply Acknowledgment (RREP-ACK) Message Format

   The Route Reply Acknowledgment (RREP-ACK) message MUST be sent in
   response to a RREP message with the 'A' bit set (see section 5.2).
   This is typically done when there is danger of unidirectional links
   preventing the completion of a Route Discovery cycle (see section
   6.8).

    0                   1
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     Type      |   Reserved    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Type        4

      Reserved    Sent as 0; ignored on reception.

6. AODV Operation

   This section describes the scenarios under which nodes generate Route
   Request (RREQ), Route Reply (RREP) and Route Error (RERR) messages
   for unicast communication towards a destination, and how the message
   data are handled.  In order to process the messages correctly,
   certain state information has to be maintained in the route table
   entries for the destinations of interest.

   All AODV messages are sent to port 654 using UDP.

6.1. Maintaining Sequence Numbers

   Every route table entry at every node MUST include the latest
   information available about the sequence number for the IP address of
   the destination node for which the route table entry is maintained.
   This sequence number is called the "destination sequence number".  It
   is updated whenever a node receives new (i.e., not stale) information
   about the sequence number from RREQ, RREP, or RERR messages that may
   be received related to that destination.  AODV depends on each node
   in the network to own and maintain its destination sequence number to
   guarantee the loop-freedom of all routes towards that node.  A
   destination node increments its own sequence number in two
   circumstances:

   -  Immediately before a node originates a route discovery, it MUST
      increment its own sequence number.  This prevents conflicts with
      previously established reverse routes towards the originator of a
      RREQ.




Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 11]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   -  Immediately before a destination node originates a RREP in
      response to a RREQ, it MUST update its own sequence number to the
      maximum of its current sequence number and the destination
      sequence number in the RREQ packet.

   When the destination increments its sequence number, it MUST do so by
   treating the sequence number value as if it were an unsigned number.
   To accomplish sequence number rollover, if the sequence number has
   already been assigned to be the largest possible number representable
   as a 32-bit unsigned integer (i.e., 4294967295), then when it is
   incremented it will then have a value of zero (0).  On the other
   hand, if the sequence number currently has the value 2147483647,
   which is the largest possible positive integer if 2's complement
   arithmetic is in use with 32-bit integers, the next value will be
   2147483648, which is the most negative possible integer in the same
   numbering system.  The representation of negative numbers is not
   relevant to the increment of AODV sequence numbers.  This is in
   contrast to the manner in which the result of comparing two AODV
   sequence numbers is to be treated (see below).

   In order to ascertain that information about a destination is not
   stale, the node compares its current numerical value for the sequence
   number with that obtained from the incoming AODV message.  This
   comparison MUST be done using signed 32-bit arithmetic, this is
   necessary to accomplish sequence number rollover.  If the result of
   subtracting the currently stored sequence number from the value of
   the incoming sequence number is less than zero, then the information
   related to that destination in the AODV message MUST be discarded,
   since that information is stale compared to the node's currently
   stored information.

   The only other circumstance in which a node may change the
   destination sequence number in one of its route table entries is in
   response to a lost or expired link to the next hop towards that
   destination.  The node determines which destinations use a particular
   next hop by consulting its routing table.  In this case, for each
   destination that uses the next hop, the node increments the sequence
   number and marks the route as invalid (see also sections 6.11, 6.12).
   Whenever any fresh enough (i.e., containing a sequence number at
   least equal to the recorded sequence number) routing information for
   an affected destination is received by a node that has marked that
   route table entry as invalid, the node SHOULD update its route table
   information according to the information contained in the update.








Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 12]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   A node may change the sequence number in the routing table entry of a
   destination only if:

   -  it is itself the destination node, and offers a new route to
      itself, or

   -  it receives an AODV message with new information about the
      sequence number for a destination node, or

   -  the path towards the destination node expires or breaks.

6.2. Route Table Entries and Precursor Lists

   When a node receives an AODV control packet from a neighbor, or
   creates or updates a route for a particular destination or subnet, it
   checks its route table for an entry for the destination.  In the
   event that there is no corresponding entry for that destination, an
   entry is created.  The sequence number is either determined from the
   information contained in the control packet, or else the valid
   sequence number field is set to false.  The route is only updated if
   the new sequence number is either

   (i)       higher than the destination sequence number in the route
             table, or

   (ii)      the sequence numbers are equal, but the hop count (of the
             new information) plus one, is smaller than the existing hop
             count in the routing table, or

   (iii)     the sequence number is unknown.

   The Lifetime field of the routing table entry is either determined
   from the control packet, or it is initialized to
   ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT.  This route may now be used to send any queued
   data packets and fulfills any outstanding route requests.

   Each time a route is used to forward a data packet, its Active Route
   Lifetime field of the source, destination and the next hop on the
   path to the destination is updated to be no less than the current
   time plus ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT.  Since the route between each
   originator and destination pair is expected to be symmetric, the
   Active Route Lifetime for the previous hop, along the reverse path
   back to the IP source, is also updated to be no less than the current
   time plus ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT.  The lifetime for an Active Route is
   updated each time the route is used regardless of whether the
   destination is a single node or a subnet.





Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 13]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   For each valid route maintained by a node as a routing table entry,
   the node also maintains a list of precursors that may be forwarding
   packets on this route.  These precursors will receive notifications
   from the node in the event of detection of the loss of the next hop
   link.  The list of precursors in a routing table entry contains those
   neighboring nodes to which a route reply was generated or forwarded.

6.3. Generating Route Requests

   A node disseminates a RREQ when it determines that it needs a route
   to a destination and does not have one available.  This can happen if
   the destination is previously unknown to the node, or if a previously
   valid route to the destination expires or is marked as invalid.  The
   Destination Sequence Number field in the RREQ message is the last
   known destination sequence number for this destination and is copied
   from the Destination Sequence Number field in the routing table.  If
   no sequence number is known, the unknown sequence number flag MUST be
   set.  The Originator Sequence Number in the RREQ message is the
   node's own sequence number, which is incremented prior to insertion
   in a RREQ.  The RREQ ID field is incremented by one from the last
   RREQ ID used by the current node.  Each node maintains only one RREQ
   ID.  The Hop Count field is set to zero.

   Before broadcasting the RREQ, the originating node buffers the RREQ
   ID and the Originator IP address (its own address) of the RREQ for
   PATH_DISCOVERY_TIME.  In this way, when the node receives the packet
   again from its neighbors, it will not reprocess and re-forward the
   packet.

   An originating node often expects to have bidirectional
   communications with a destination node.  In such cases, it is not
   sufficient for the originating node to have a route to the
   destination node; the destination must also have a route back to the
   originating node.  In order for this to happen as efficiently as
   possible, any generation of a RREP by an intermediate node (as in
   section 6.6) for delivery to the originating node SHOULD be
   accompanied by some action that notifies the destination about a
   route back to the originating node.  The originating node selects
   this mode of operation in the intermediate nodes by setting the 'G'
   flag.  See section 6.6.3 for details about actions taken by the
   intermediate node in response to a RREQ with the 'G' flag set.

   A node SHOULD NOT originate more than RREQ_RATELIMIT RREQ messages
   per second.  After broadcasting a RREQ, a node waits for a RREP (or
   other control message with current information regarding a route to
   the appropriate destination).  If a route is not received within
   NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME milliseconds, the node MAY try again to discover a
   route by broadcasting another RREQ, up to a maximum of RREQ_RETRIES



Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 14]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   times at the maximum TTL value.  Each new attempt MUST increment and
   update the RREQ ID.  For each attempt, the TTL field of the IP header
   is set according to the mechanism specified in section 6.4, in order
   to enable control over how far the RREQ is disseminated for the each
   retry.

   Data packets waiting for a route (i.e., waiting for a RREP after a
   RREQ has been sent) SHOULD be buffered.  The buffering SHOULD be
   "first-in, first-out" (FIFO).  If a route discovery has been
   attempted RREQ_RETRIES times at the maximum TTL without receiving any
   RREP, all data packets destined for the corresponding destination
   SHOULD be dropped from the buffer and a Destination Unreachable
   message SHOULD be delivered to the application.

   To reduce congestion in a network, repeated attempts by a source node
   at route discovery for a single destination MUST utilize a binary
   exponential backoff.  The first time a source node broadcasts a RREQ,
   it waits NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME milliseconds for the reception of a RREP.
   If a RREP is not received within that time, the source node sends a
   new RREQ.  When calculating the time to wait for the RREP after
   sending the second RREQ, the source node MUST use a binary
   exponential backoff.  Hence, the waiting time for the RREP
   corresponding to the second RREQ is 2 * NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME
   milliseconds.  If a RREP is not received within this time period,
   another RREQ may be sent, up to RREQ_RETRIES additional attempts
   after the first RREQ.  For each additional attempt, the waiting time
   for the RREP is multiplied by 2, so that the time conforms to a
   binary exponential backoff.

6.4. Controlling Dissemination of Route Request Messages

   To prevent unnecessary network-wide dissemination of RREQs, the
   originating node SHOULD use an expanding ring search technique.  In
   an expanding ring search, the originating node initially uses a TTL =
   TTL_START in the RREQ packet IP header and sets the timeout for
   receiving a RREP to RING_TRAVERSAL_TIME milliseconds.
   RING_TRAVERSAL_TIME is calculated as described in section 10.  The
   TTL_VALUE used in calculating RING_TRAVERSAL_TIME is set equal to the
   value of the TTL field in the IP header.  If the RREQ times out
   without a corresponding RREP, the originator broadcasts the RREQ
   again with the TTL incremented by TTL_INCREMENT.  This continues
   until the TTL set in the RREQ reaches TTL_THRESHOLD, beyond which a
   TTL = NET_DIAMETER is used for each attempt.  Each time, the timeout
   for receiving a RREP is RING_TRAVERSAL_TIME.  When it is desired to
   have all retries traverse the entire ad hoc network, this can be
   achieved by configuring TTL_START and TTL_INCREMENT both to be the
   same value as NET_DIAMETER.




Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 15]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   The Hop Count stored in an invalid routing table entry indicates the
   last known hop count to that destination in the routing table.  When
   a new route to the same destination is required at a later time
   (e.g., upon route loss), the TTL in the RREQ IP header is initially
   set to the Hop Count plus TTL_INCREMENT.  Thereafter, following each
   timeout the TTL is incremented by TTL_INCREMENT until TTL =
   TTL_THRESHOLD is reached.  Beyond this TTL = NET_DIAMETER is used.
   Once TTL = NET_DIAMETER, the timeout for waiting for the RREP is set
   to NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME, as specified in section 6.3.

   An expired routing table entry SHOULD NOT be expunged before
   (current_time + DELETE_PERIOD) (see section 6.11).  Otherwise, the
   soft state corresponding to the route (e.g., last known hop count)
   will be lost.  Furthermore, a longer routing table entry expunge time
   MAY be configured.  Any routing table entry waiting for a RREP SHOULD
   NOT be expunged before (current_time + 2 * NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME).

6.5. Processing and Forwarding Route Requests

   When a node receives a RREQ, it first creates or updates a route to
   the previous hop without a valid sequence number (see section 6.2)
   then checks to determine whether it has received a RREQ with the same
   Originator IP Address and RREQ ID within at least the last
   PATH_DISCOVERY_TIME.  If such a RREQ has been received, the node
   silently discards the newly received RREQ.  The rest of this
   subsection describes actions taken for RREQs that are not discarded.

   First, it first increments the hop count value in the RREQ by one, to
   account for the new hop through the intermediate node.  Then the node
   searches for a reverse route to the Originator IP Address (see
   section 6.2), using longest-prefix matching.  If need be, the route
   is created, or updated using the Originator Sequence Number from the
   RREQ in its routing table.  This reverse route will be needed if the
   node receives a RREP back to the node that originated the RREQ
   (identified by the Originator IP Address).  When the reverse route is
   created or updated, the following actions on the route are also
   carried out:

   1. the Originator Sequence Number from the RREQ is compared to the
      corresponding destination sequence number in the route table entry
      and copied if greater than the existing value there

   2. the valid sequence number field is set to true;

   3. the next hop in the routing table becomes the node from which the
      RREQ was received (it is obtained from the source IP address in
      the IP header and is often not equal to the Originator IP Address
      field in the RREQ message);



Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 16]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   4. the hop count is copied from the Hop Count in the RREQ message;

   Whenever a RREQ message is received, the Lifetime of the reverse
   route entry for the Originator IP address is set to be the maximum of
   (ExistingLifetime, MinimalLifetime), where

      MinimalLifetime =    (current time + 2*NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME -
                           2*HopCount*NODE_TRAVERSAL_TIME).

   The current node can use the reverse route to forward data packets in
   the same way as for any other route in the routing table.

   If a node does not generate a RREP (following the processing rules in
   section 6.6), and if the incoming IP header has TTL larger than 1,
   the node updates and broadcasts the RREQ to address 255.255.255.255
   on each of its configured interfaces (see section 6.14).  To update
   the RREQ, the TTL or hop limit field in the outgoing IP header is
   decreased by one, and the Hop Count field in the RREQ message is
   incremented by one, to account for the new hop through the
   intermediate node.  Lastly, the Destination Sequence number for the
   requested destination is set to the maximum of the corresponding
   value received in the RREQ message, and the destination sequence
   value currently maintained by the node for the requested destination.
   However, the forwarding node MUST NOT modify its maintained value for
   the destination sequence number, even if the value received in the
   incoming RREQ is larger than the value currently maintained by the
   forwarding node.

   Otherwise, if a node does generate a RREP, then the node discards the
   RREQ.  Notice that, if intermediate nodes reply to every transmission
   of RREQs for a particular destination, it might turn out that the
   destination does not receive any of the discovery messages.  In this
   situation, the destination does not learn of a route to the
   originating node from the RREQ messages.  This could cause the
   destination to initiate a route discovery (for example, if the
   originator is attempting to establish a TCP session).  In order that
   the destination learn of routes to the originating node, the
   originating node SHOULD set the "gratuitous RREP" ('G') flag in the
   RREQ if for any reason the destination is likely to need a route to
   the originating node.  If, in response to a RREQ with the 'G' flag
   set, an intermediate node returns a RREP, it MUST also unicast a
   gratuitous RREP to the destination node (see section 6.6.3).









Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 17]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


6.6. Generating Route Replies

   A node generates a RREP if either:

   (i)       it is itself the destination, or

   (ii)      it has an active route to the destination, the destination
             sequence number in the node's existing route table entry
             for the destination is valid and greater than or equal to
             the Destination Sequence Number of the RREQ (comparison
             using signed 32-bit arithmetic), and the "destination only"
             ('D') flag is NOT set.

   When generating a RREP message, a node copies the Destination IP
   Address and the Originator Sequence Number from the RREQ message into
   the corresponding fields in the RREP message.  Processing is slightly
   different, depending on whether the node is itself the requested
   destination (see section 6.6.1), or instead if it is an intermediate
   node with an fresh enough route to the destination (see section
   6.6.2).

   Once created, the RREP is unicast to the next hop toward the
   originator of the RREQ, as indicated by the route table entry for
   that originator.  As the RREP is forwarded back towards the node
   which originated the RREQ message, the Hop Count field is incremented
   by one at each hop.  Thus, when the RREP reaches the originator, the
   Hop Count represents the distance, in hops, of the destination from
   the originator.

6.6.1. Route Reply Generation by the Destination

   If the generating node is the destination itself, it MUST increment
   its own sequence number by one if the sequence number in the RREQ
   packet is equal to that incremented value.  Otherwise, the
   destination does not change its sequence number before generating the
   RREP message.  The destination node places its (perhaps newly
   incremented) sequence number into the Destination Sequence Number
   field of the RREP, and enters the value zero in the Hop Count field
   of the RREP.

   The destination node copies the value MY_ROUTE_TIMEOUT (see section
   10) into the Lifetime field of the RREP.  Each node MAY reconfigure
   its value for MY_ROUTE_TIMEOUT, within mild constraints (see section
   10).







Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 18]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


6.6.2. Route Reply Generation by an Intermediate Node

   If the node generating the RREP is not the destination node, but
   instead is an intermediate hop along the path from the originator to
   the destination, it copies its known sequence number for the
   destination into the Destination Sequence Number field in the RREP
   message.

   The intermediate node updates the forward route entry by placing the
   last hop node (from which it received the RREQ, as indicated by the
   source IP address field in the IP header) into the precursor list for
   the forward route entry -- i.e., the entry for the Destination IP
   Address.  The intermediate node also updates its route table entry
   for the node originating the RREQ by placing the next hop towards the
   destination in the precursor list for the reverse route entry --
   i.e., the entry for the Originator IP Address field of the RREQ
   message data.

   The intermediate node places its distance in hops from the
   destination (indicated by the hop count in the routing table) Count
   field in the RREP.  The Lifetime field of the RREP is calculated by
   subtracting the current time from the expiration time in its route
   table entry.

6.6.3. Generating Gratuitous RREPs

   After a node receives a RREQ and responds with a RREP, it discards
   the RREQ.  If the RREQ has the 'G' flag set, and the intermediate
   node returns a RREP to the originating node, it MUST also unicast a
   gratuitous RREP to the destination node.  The gratuitous RREP that is
   to be sent to the desired destination contains the following values
   in the RREP message fields:

   Hop Count                        The Hop Count as indicated in the
                                    node's route table entry for the
                                    originator

   Destination IP Address           The IP address of the node that
                                    originated the RREQ

   Destination Sequence Number      The Originator Sequence Number from
                                    the RREQ

   Originator IP Address            The IP address of the Destination
                                    node in the RREQ






Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 19]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   Lifetime                         The remaining lifetime of the route
                                    towards the originator of the RREQ,
                                    as known by the intermediate node.

   The gratuitous RREP is then sent to the next hop along the path to
   the destination node, just as if the destination node had already
   issued a RREQ for the originating node and this RREP was produced in
   response to that (fictitious) RREQ.  The RREP that is sent to the
   originator of the RREQ is the same whether or not the 'G' bit is set.

6.7. Receiving and Forwarding Route Replies

   When a node receives a RREP message, it searches (using longest-
   prefix matching) for a route to the previous hop.  If needed, a route
   is created for the previous hop, but without a valid sequence number
   (see section 6.2).  Next, the node then increments the hop count
   value in the RREP by one, to account for the new hop through the
   intermediate node.  Call this incremented value the "New Hop Count".
   Then the forward route for this destination is created if it does not
   already exist.  Otherwise, the node compares the Destination Sequence
   Number in the message with its own stored destination sequence number
   for the Destination IP Address in the RREP message.  Upon comparison,
   the existing entry is updated only in the following circumstances:

   (i)       the sequence number in the routing table is marked as
             invalid in route table entry.

   (ii)      the Destination Sequence Number in the RREP is greater than
             the node's copy of the destination sequence number and the
             known value is valid, or

   (iii)     the sequence numbers are the same, but the route is is
             marked as inactive, or

   (iv)      the sequence numbers are the same, and the New Hop Count is
             smaller than the hop count in route table entry.

   If the route table entry to the destination is created or updated,
   then the following actions occur:

   -  the route is marked as active,

   -  the destination sequence number is marked as valid,

   -  the next hop in the route entry is assigned to be the node from
      which the RREP is received, which is indicated by the source IP
      address field in the IP header,




Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 20]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   -  the hop count is set to the value of the New Hop Count,

   -  the expiry time is set to the current time plus the value of the
      Lifetime in the RREP message,

   -  and the destination sequence number is the Destination Sequence
      Number in the RREP message.

   The current node can subsequently use this route to forward data
   packets to the destination.

   If the current node is not the node indicated by the Originator IP
   Address in the RREP message AND a forward route has been created or
   updated as described above, the node consults its route table entry
   for the originating node to determine the next hop for the RREP
   packet, and then forwards the RREP towards the originator using the
   information in that route table entry.  If a node forwards a RREP
   over a link that is likely to have errors or be unidirectional, the
   node SHOULD set the 'A' flag to require that the recipient of the
   RREP acknowledge receipt of the RREP by sending a RREP-ACK message
   back (see section 6.8).

   When any node transmits a RREP, the precursor list for the
   corresponding destination node is updated by adding to it the next
   hop node to which the RREP is forwarded.  Also, at each node the
   (reverse) route used to forward a RREP has its lifetime changed to be
   the maximum of (existing-lifetime, (current time +
   ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT).  Finally, the precursor list for the next hop
   towards the destination is updated to contain the next hop towards
   the source.

6.8. Operation over Unidirectional Links

   It is possible that a RREP transmission may fail, especially if the
   RREQ transmission triggering the RREP occurs over a unidirectional
   link.  If no other RREP generated from the same route discovery
   attempt reaches the node which originated the RREQ message, the
   originator will reattempt route discovery after a timeout (see
   section 6.3).  However, the same scenario might well be repeated
   without any improvement, and no route would be discovered even after
   repeated retries.  Unless corrective action is taken, this can happen
   even when bidirectional routes between originator and destination do
   exist.  Link layers using broadcast transmissions for the RREQ will
   not be able to detect the presence of such unidirectional links.  In
   AODV, any node acts on only the first RREQ with the same RREQ ID and
   ignores any subsequent RREQs.  Suppose, for example, that the first





Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 21]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   RREQ arrives along a path that has one or more unidirectional
   link(s).  A subsequent RREQ may arrive via a bidirectional path
   (assuming such paths exist), but it will be ignored.

   To prevent this problem, when a node detects that its transmission of
   a RREP message has failed, it remembers the next-hop of the failed
   RREP in a "blacklist" set.  Such failures can be detected via the
   absence of a link-layer or network-layer acknowledgment (e.g., RREP-
   ACK).  A node ignores all RREQs received from any node in its
   blacklist set.  Nodes are removed from the blacklist set after a
   BLACKLIST_TIMEOUT period (see section 10).  This period should be set
   to the upper bound of the time it takes to perform the allowed number
   of route request retry attempts as described in section 6.3.

   Note that the RREP-ACK packet does not contain any information about
   which RREP it is acknowledging.  The time at which the RREP-ACK is
   received will likely come just after the time when the RREP was sent
   with the 'A' bit.  This information is expected to be sufficient to
   provide assurance to the sender of the RREP that the link is
   currently bidirectional, without any real dependence on the
   particular RREP message being acknowledged.  However, that assurance
   typically cannot be expected to remain in force permanently.

6.9. Hello Messages

   A node MAY offer connectivity information by broadcasting local Hello
   messages.  A node SHOULD only use hello messages if it is part of an
   active route.  Every HELLO_INTERVAL milliseconds, the node checks
   whether it has sent a broadcast (e.g., a RREQ or an appropriate layer
   2 message) within the last HELLO_INTERVAL.  If it has not, it MAY
   broadcast a RREP with TTL = 1, called a Hello message, with the RREP
   message fields set as follows:

      Destination IP Address         The node's IP address.

      Destination Sequence Number    The node's latest sequence number.

      Hop Count                      0

      Lifetime                       ALLOWED_HELLO_LOSS * HELLO_INTERVAL

   A node MAY determine connectivity by listening for packets from its
   set of neighbors.  If, within the past DELETE_PERIOD, it has received
   a Hello message from a neighbor, and then for that neighbor does not
   receive any packets (Hello messages or otherwise) for more than






Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 22]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   ALLOWED_HELLO_LOSS * HELLO_INTERVAL milliseconds, the node SHOULD
   assume that the link to this neighbor is currently lost.  When this
   happens, the node SHOULD proceed as in Section 6.11.

   Whenever a node receives a Hello message from a neighbor, the node
   SHOULD make sure that it has an active route to the neighbor, and
   create one if necessary.  If a route already exists, then the
   Lifetime for the route should be increased, if necessary, to be at
   least ALLOWED_HELLO_LOSS * HELLO_INTERVAL.  The route to the
   neighbor, if it exists, MUST subsequently contain the latest
   Destination Sequence Number from the Hello message.  The current node
   can now begin using this route to forward data packets.  Routes that
   are created by hello messages and not used by any other active routes
   will have empty precursor lists and would not trigger a RERR message
   if the neighbor moves away and a neighbor timeout occurs.

6.10. Maintaining Local Connectivity

   Each forwarding node SHOULD keep track of its continued connectivity
   to its active next hops (i.e., which next hops or precursors have
   forwarded packets to or from the forwarding node during the last
   ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT), as well as neighbors that have transmitted
   Hello messages during the last (ALLOWED_HELLO_LOSS * HELLO_INTERVAL).
   A node can maintain accurate information about its continued
   connectivity to these active next hops, using one or more of the
   available link or network layer mechanisms, as described below.

   -  Any suitable link layer notification, such as those provided by
      IEEE 802.11, can be used to determine connectivity, each time a
      packet is transmitted to an active next hop.  For example, absence
      of a link layer ACK or failure to get a CTS after sending RTS,
      even after the maximum number of retransmission attempts,
      indicates loss of the link to this active next hop.

   -  If layer-2 notification is not available, passive acknowledgment
      SHOULD be used when the next hop is expected to forward the
      packet, by listening to the channel for a transmission attempt
      made by the next hop.  If transmission is not detected within
      NEXT_HOP_WAIT milliseconds or the next hop is the destination (and
      thus is not supposed to forward the packet) one of the following
      methods SHOULD be used to determine connectivity:

      *  Receiving any packet (including a Hello message) from the next
         hop.

      *  A RREQ unicast to the next hop, asking for a route to the next
         hop.




Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 23]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


      *  An ICMP Echo Request message unicast to the next hop.

   If a link to the next hop cannot be detected by any of these methods,
   the forwarding node SHOULD assume that the link is lost, and take
   corrective action by following the methods specified in Section 6.11.

6.11. Route Error (RERR) Messages, Route Expiry and Route Deletion

   Generally, route error and link breakage processing requires the
   following steps:

   -  Invalidating existing routes

   -  Listing affected destinations

   -  Determining which, if any, neighbors may be affected

   -  Delivering an appropriate RERR to such neighbors

   A Route Error (RERR) message MAY be either broadcast (if there are
   many precursors), unicast (if there is only 1 precursor), or
   iteratively unicast to all precursors (if broadcast is
   inappropriate).  Even when the RERR message is iteratively unicast to
   several precursors, it is considered to be a single control message
   for the purposes of the description in the text that follows.  With
   that understanding, a node SHOULD NOT generate more than
   RERR_RATELIMIT RERR messages per second.

   A node initiates processing for a RERR message in three situations:

   (i)       if it detects a link break for the next hop of an active
             route in its routing table while transmitting data (and
             route repair, if attempted, was unsuccessful), or

   (ii)      if it gets a data packet destined to a node for which it
             does not have an active route and is not repairing (if
             using local repair), or

   (iii)     if it receives a RERR from a neighbor for one or more
             active routes.

   For case (i), the node first makes a list of unreachable destinations
   consisting of the unreachable neighbor and any additional
   destinations (or subnets, see section 7) in the local routing table
   that use the unreachable neighbor as the next hop.  In this case, if
   a subnet route is found to be newly unreachable, an IP destination
   address for the subnet is constructed by appending zeroes to the




Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 24]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   subnet prefix as shown in the route table entry.  This is
   unambiguous, since the precursor is known to have route table
   information with a compatible prefix length for that subnet.

   For case (ii), there is only one unreachable destination, which is
   the destination of the data packet that cannot be delivered.  For
   case (iii), the list should consist of those destinations in the RERR
   for which there exists a corresponding entry in the local routing
   table that has the transmitter of the received RERR as the next hop.

   Some of the unreachable destinations in the list could be used by
   neighboring nodes, and it may therefore be necessary to send a (new)
   RERR.  The RERR should contain those destinations that are part of
   the created list of unreachable destinations and have a non-empty
   precursor list.

   The neighboring node(s) that should receive the RERR are all those
   that belong to a precursor list of at least one of the unreachable
   destination(s) in the newly created RERR.  In case there is only one
   unique neighbor that needs to receive the RERR, the RERR SHOULD be
   unicast toward that neighbor.  Otherwise the RERR is typically sent
   to the local broadcast address (Destination IP == 255.255.255.255,
   TTL == 1) with the unreachable destinations, and their corresponding
   destination sequence numbers, included in the packet.  The DestCount
   field of the RERR packet indicates the number of unreachable
   destinations included in the packet.

   Just before transmitting the RERR, certain updates are made on the
   routing table that may affect the destination sequence numbers for
   the unreachable destinations.  For each one of these destinations,
   the corresponding routing table entry is updated as follows:

   1. The destination sequence number of this routing entry, if it
      exists and is valid, is incremented for cases (i) and (ii) above,
      and copied from the incoming RERR in case (iii) above.

   2. The entry is invalidated by marking the route entry as invalid

   3. The Lifetime field is updated to current time plus DELETE_PERIOD.
      Before this time, the entry SHOULD NOT be deleted.

   Note that the Lifetime field in the routing table plays dual role --
   for an active route it is the expiry time, and for an invalid route
   it is the deletion time.  If a data packet is received for an invalid
   route, the Lifetime field is updated to current time plus
   DELETE_PERIOD.  The determination of DELETE_PERIOD is discussed in
   Section 10.




Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 25]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


6.12. Local Repair

   When a link break in an active route occurs, the node upstream of
   that break MAY choose to repair the link locally if the destination
   was no farther than MAX_REPAIR_TTL hops away.  To repair the link
   break, the node increments the sequence number for the destination
   and then broadcasts a RREQ for that destination.  The TTL of the RREQ
   should initially be set to the following value:

      max(MIN_REPAIR_TTL, 0.5 * #hops) + LOCAL_ADD_TTL,

   where #hops is the number of hops to the sender (originator) of the
   currently undeliverable packet.  Thus, local repair attempts will
   often be invisible to the originating node, and will always have TTL
   >= MIN_REPAIR_TTL + LOCAL_ADD_TTL.  The node initiating the repair
   then waits the discovery period to receive RREPs in response to the
   RREQ.  During local repair data packets SHOULD be buffered.  If, at
   the end of the discovery period, the repairing node has not received
   a RREP (or other control message creating or updating the route) for
   that destination, it proceeds as described in Section 6.11 by
   transmitting a RERR message for that destination.

   On the other hand, if the node receives one or more RREPs (or other
   control message creating or updating the route to the desired
   destination) during the discovery period, it first compares the hop
   count of the new route with the value in the hop count field of the
   invalid route table entry for that destination.  If the hop count of
   the newly determined route to the destination is greater than the hop
   count of the previously known route the node SHOULD issue a RERR
   message for the destination, with the 'N' bit set.  Then it proceeds
   as described in Section 6.7, updating its route table entry for that
   destination.

   A node that receives a RERR message with the 'N' flag set MUST NOT
   delete the route to that destination.  The only action taken should
   be the retransmission of the message, if the RERR arrived from the
   next hop along that route, and if there are one or more precursor
   nodes for that route to the destination.  When the originating node
   receives a RERR message with the 'N' flag set, if this message came
   from its next hop along its route to the destination then the
   originating node MAY choose to reinitiate route discovery, as
   described in Section 6.3.

   Local repair of link breaks in routes sometimes results in increased
   path lengths to those destinations.  Repairing the link locally is
   likely to increase the number of data packets that are able to be
   delivered to the destinations, since data packets will not be dropped
   as the RERR travels to the originating node.  Sending a RERR to the



Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 26]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   originating node after locally repairing the link break may allow the
   originator to find a fresh route to the destination that is better,
   based on current node positions.  However, it does not require the
   originating node to rebuild the route, as the originator may be done,
   or nearly done, with the data session.

   When a link breaks along an active route, there are often multiple
   destinations that become unreachable.  The node that is upstream of
   the lost link tries an immediate local repair for only the one
   destination towards which the data packet was traveling.  Other
   routes using the same link MUST be marked as invalid, but the node
   handling the local repair MAY flag each such newly lost route as
   locally repairable; this local repair flag in the route table MUST be
   reset when the route times out (e.g., after the route has been not
   been active for ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT).  Before the timeout occurs,
   these other routes will be repaired as needed when packets arrive for
   the other destinations.  Hence, these routes are repaired as needed;
   if a data packet does not arrive for the route, then that route will
   not be repaired.  Alternatively, depending upon local congestion, the
   node MAY begin the process of establishing local repairs for the
   other routes, without waiting for new packets to arrive.  By
   proactively repairing the routes that have broken due to the loss of
   the link, incoming data packets for those routes will not be subject
   to the delay of repairing the route and can be immediately forwarded.
   However, repairing the route before a data packet is received for it
   runs the risk of repairing routes that are no longer in use.
   Therefore, depending upon the local traffic in the network and
   whether congestion is being experienced, the node MAY elect to
   proactively repair the routes before a data packet is received;
   otherwise, it can wait until a data is received, and then commence
   the repair of the route.

6.13. Actions After Reboot

   A node participating in the ad hoc network must take certain actions
   after reboot as it might lose all sequence number records for all
   destinations, including its own sequence number.  However, there may
   be neighboring nodes that are using this node as an active next hop.
   This can potentially create routing loops.  To prevent this
   possibility, each node on reboot waits for DELETE_PERIOD before
   transmitting any route discovery messages.  If the node receives a
   RREQ, RREP, or RERR control packet, it SHOULD create route entries as
   appropriate given the sequence number information in the control
   packets, but MUST not forward any control packets.  If the node
   receives a data packet for some other destination, it SHOULD
   broadcast a RERR as described in subsection 6.11 and MUST reset the
   waiting timer to expire after current time plus DELETE_PERIOD.




Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 27]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   It can be shown [4] that by the time the rebooted node comes out of
   the waiting phase and becomes an active router again, none of its
   neighbors will be using it as an active next hop any more.  Its own
   sequence number gets updated once it receives a RREQ from any other
   node, as the RREQ always carries the maximum destination sequence
   number seen en route.  If no such RREQ arrives, the node MUST
   initialize its own sequence number to zero.

6.14. Interfaces

   Because AODV should operate smoothly over wired, as well as wireless,
   networks, and because it is likely that AODV will also be used with
   multiple wireless devices, the particular interface over which
   packets arrive must be known to AODV whenever a packet is received.
   This includes the reception of RREQ, RREP, and RERR messages.
   Whenever a packet is received from a new neighbor, the interface on
   which that packet was received is recorded into the route table entry
   for that neighbor, along with all the other appropriate routing
   information.  Similarly, whenever a route to a new destination is
   learned, the interface through which the destination can be reached
   is also recorded into the destination's route table entry.

   When multiple interfaces are available, a node retransmitting a RREQ
   message rebroadcasts that message on all interfaces that have been
   configured for operation in the ad-hoc network, except those on which
   it is known that all of the nodes neighbors have already received the
   RREQ For instance, for some broadcast media (e.g., Ethernet) it may
   be presumed that all nodes on the same link receive a broadcast
   message at the same time.  When a node needs to transmit a RERR, it
   SHOULD only transmit it on those interfaces that have neighboring
   precursor nodes for that route.

7. AODV and Aggregated Networks

   AODV has been designed for use by mobile nodes with IP addresses that
   are not necessarily related to each other, to create an ad hoc
   network.  However, in some cases a collection of mobile nodes MAY
   operate in a fixed relationship to each other and share a common
   subnet prefix, moving together within an area where an ad hoc network
   has formed.  Call such a collection of nodes a "subnet".  In this
   case, it is possible for a single node within the subnet to advertise
   reachability for all other nodes on the subnet, by responding with a
   RREP message to any RREQ message requesting a route to any node with
   the subnet routing prefix.  Call the single node the "subnet router".
   In order for a subnet router to operate the AODV protocol for the
   whole subnet, it has to maintain a destination sequence number for
   the entire subnet.  In any such RREP message sent by the subnet
   router, the Prefix Size field of the RREP message MUST be set to the



Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 28]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   length of the subnet prefix.  Other nodes sharing the subnet prefix
   SHOULD NOT issue RREP messages, and SHOULD forward RREQ messages to
   the subnet router.

   The processing for RREPs that give routes to subnets (i.e., have
   nonzero prefix length) is the same as processing for host-specific
   RREP messages.  Every node that receives the RREP with prefix size
   information SHOULD create or update the route table entry for the
   subnet, including the sequence number supplied by the subnet router,
   and including the appropriate precursor information.  Then, in the
   future the node can use the information to avoid sending future RREQs
   for other nodes on the same subnet.

   When a node uses a subnet route it may be that a packet is routed to
   an IP address on the subnet that is not assigned to any existing node
   in the ad hoc network.  When that happens, the subnet router MUST
   return ICMP Host Unreachable message to the sending node.  Upstream
   nodes receiving such an ICMP message SHOULD record the information
   that the particular IP address is unreachable, but MUST NOT
   invalidate the route entry for any matching subnet prefix.

   If several nodes in the subnet advertise reachability to the subnet
   defined by the subnet prefix, the node with the lowest IP address is
   elected to be the subnet router, and all other nodes MUST stop
   advertising reachability.

   The behavior of default routes (i.e., routes with routing prefix
   length 0) is not defined in this specification.  Selection of routes
   sharing prefix bits should be according to longest match first.

8. Using AODV with Other Networks

   In some configurations, an ad hoc network may be able to provide
   connectivity between external routing domains that do not use AODV.
   If the points of contact to the other networks can act as subnet
   routers (see Section 7) for any relevant networks within the external
   routing domains, then the ad hoc network can maintain connectivity to
   the external routing domains.  Indeed, the external routing networks
   can use the ad hoc network defined by AODV as a transit network.

   In order to provide this feature, a point of contact to an external
   network (call it an Infrastructure Router) has to act as the subnet
   router for every subnet of interest within the external network for
   which the Infrastructure Router can provide reachability.  This
   includes the need for maintaining a destination sequence number for
   that external subnet.





Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 29]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   If multiple Infrastructure Routers offer reachability to the same
   external subnet, those Infrastructure Routers have to cooperate (by
   means outside the scope of this specification) to provide consistent
   AODV semantics for ad hoc access to those subnets.

9. Extensions

   In this section, the format of extensions to the RREQ and RREP
   messages is specified.  All such extensions appear after the message
   data, and have the following 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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     Type      |    Length     |     type-specific data ...
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   where:

   Type     1-255

   Length   The length of the type-specific data, not including the Type
            and Length fields of the extension in bytes.

   Extensions with types between 128 and 255 may NOT be skipped.  The
   rules for extensions will be spelled out more fully, and conform to
   the rules for handling IPv6 options.

9.1. Hello Interval Extension 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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     Type      |    Length     |       Hello Interval ...      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | ... Hello Interval, continued |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type     1

   Length   4

   Hello Interval
            The number of milliseconds between successive transmissions
            of a Hello message.






Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 30]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   The Hello Interval extension MAY be appended to a RREP message with
   TTL == 1, to be used by a neighboring receiver in determine how long
   to wait for subsequent such RREP messages (i.e., Hello messages; see
   section 6.9).

10. Configuration Parameters

   This section gives default values for some important parameters
   associated with AODV protocol operations.  A particular mobile node
   may wish to change certain of the parameters, in particular the
   NET_DIAMETER, MY_ROUTE_TIMEOUT, ALLOWED_HELLO_LOSS, RREQ_RETRIES, and
   possibly the HELLO_INTERVAL.  In the latter case, the node should
   advertise the HELLO_INTERVAL in its Hello messages, by appending a
   Hello Interval Extension to the RREP message.  Choice of these
   parameters may affect the performance of the protocol.  Changing
   NODE_TRAVERSAL_TIME also changes the node's estimate of the
   NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME, and so can only be done with suitable knowledge
   about the behavior of other nodes in the ad hoc network.  The
   configured value for MY_ROUTE_TIMEOUT MUST be at least 2 *
   PATH_DISCOVERY_TIME.

   Parameter Name           Value
   ----------------------   -----
   ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT     3,000 Milliseconds
   ALLOWED_HELLO_LOSS       2
   BLACKLIST_TIMEOUT        RREQ_RETRIES * NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME
   DELETE_PERIOD            see note below
   HELLO_INTERVAL           1,000 Milliseconds
   LOCAL_ADD_TTL            2
   MAX_REPAIR_TTL           0.3 * NET_DIAMETER
   MIN_REPAIR_TTL           see note below
   MY_ROUTE_TIMEOUT         2 * ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT
   NET_DIAMETER             35
   NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME       2 * NODE_TRAVERSAL_TIME * NET_DIAMETER
   NEXT_HOP_WAIT            NODE_TRAVERSAL_TIME + 10
   NODE_TRAVERSAL_TIME      40 milliseconds
   PATH_DISCOVERY_TIME      2 * NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME
   RERR_RATELIMIT           10
   RING_TRAVERSAL_TIME      2 * NODE_TRAVERSAL_TIME *
                            (TTL_VALUE + TIMEOUT_BUFFER)
   RREQ_RETRIES             2
   RREQ_RATELIMIT           10
   TIMEOUT_BUFFER           2
   TTL_START                1
   TTL_INCREMENT            2
   TTL_THRESHOLD            7
   TTL_VALUE                see note below




Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 31]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   The MIN_REPAIR_TTL should be the last known hop count to the
   destination.  If Hello messages are used, then the
   ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT parameter value MUST be more than the value
   (ALLOWED_HELLO_LOSS * HELLO_INTERVAL).  For a given
   ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT value, this may require some adjustment to the
   value of the HELLO_INTERVAL, and consequently use of the Hello
   Interval Extension in the Hello messages.

   TTL_VALUE is the value of the TTL field in the IP header while the
   expanding ring search is being performed.  This is described further
   in section 6.4.  The TIMEOUT_BUFFER is configurable.  Its purpose is
   to provide a buffer for the timeout so that if the RREP is delayed
   due to congestion, a timeout is less likely to occur while the RREP
   is still en route back to the source.  To omit this buffer, set
   TIMEOUT_BUFFER = 0.

   DELETE_PERIOD is intended to provide an upper bound on the time for
   which an upstream node A can have a neighbor B as an active next hop
   for destination D, while B has invalidated the route to D.  Beyond
   this time B can delete the (already invalidated) route to D.  The
   determination of the upper bound depends somewhat on the
   characteristics of the underlying link layer.  If Hello messages are
   used to determine the continued availability of links to next hop
   nodes, DELETE_PERIOD must be at least ALLOWED_HELLO_LOSS *
   HELLO_INTERVAL.  If the link layer feedback is used to detect loss of
   link, DELETE_PERIOD must be at least ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT.  If hello
   messages are received from a neighbor but data packets to that
   neighbor are lost (e.g., due to temporary link asymmetry), we have to
   make more concrete assumptions about the underlying link layer. We
   assume that such asymmetry cannot persist beyond a certain time, say,
   a multiple K of HELLO_INTERVAL.  In other words, a node will
   invariably receive at least one out of K subsequent Hello messages
   from a neighbor if the link is working and the neighbor is sending no
   other traffic.  Covering all possibilities,

      DELETE_PERIOD = K * max (ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT, HELLO_INTERVAL)
                         (K = 5 is recommended).

   NET_DIAMETER measures the maximum possible number of hops between two
   nodes in the network.  NODE_TRAVERSAL_TIME is a conservative estimate
   of the average one hop traversal time for packets and should include
   queuing delays, interrupt processing times and transfer times.
   ACTIVE_ROUTE_TIMEOUT SHOULD be set to a longer value (at least 10,000
   milliseconds) if link-layer indications are used to detect link
   breakages such as in IEEE 802.11 [5] standard.  TTL_START should be
   set to at least 2 if Hello messages are used for local connectivity
   information.  Performance of the AODV protocol is sensitive to the
   chosen values of these constants, which often depend on the



Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 32]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


   characteristics of the underlying link layer protocol, radio
   technologies etc.  BLACKLIST_TIMEOUT should be suitably increased if
   an expanding ring search is used.  In such cases, it should be
   {[(TTL_THRESHOLD - TTL_START)/TTL_INCREMENT] + 1 + RREQ_RETRIES} *
   NET_TRAVERSAL_TIME.  This is to account for possible additional route
   discovery attempts.

11. Security Considerations

   Currently, AODV does not specify any special security measures. Route
   protocols, however, are prime targets for impersonation attacks.  In
   networks where the node membership is not known, it is difficult to
   determine the occurrence of impersonation attacks, and security
   prevention techniques are difficult at best.  However, when the
   network membership is known and there is a danger of such attacks,
   AODV control messages must be protected by use of authentication
   techniques, such as those involving generation of unforgeable and
   cryptographically strong message digests or digital signatures.
   While AODV does not place restrictions on the authentication
   mechanism used for this purpose, IPsec AH is an appropriate choice
   for cases where the nodes share an appropriate security association
   that enables the use of AH.

   In particular, RREP messages SHOULD be authenticated to avoid
   creation of spurious routes to a desired destination.  Otherwise, an
   attacker could masquerade as the desired destination, and maliciously
   deny service to the destination and/or maliciously inspect and
   consume traffic intended for delivery to the destination.  RERR
   messages, while less dangerous, SHOULD be authenticated in order to
   prevent malicious nodes from disrupting valid routes between nodes
   that are communication partners.

   AODV does not make any assumption about the method by which addresses
   are assigned to the mobile nodes, except that they are presumed to
   have unique IP addresses.  Therefore, no special consideration, other
   than what is natural because of the general protocol specifications,
   can be made about the applicability of IPsec authentication headers
   or key exchange mechanisms.  However, if the mobile nodes in the ad
   hoc network have pre-established security associations, it is
   presumed that the purposes for which the security associations are
   created include that of authorizing the processing of AODV control
   messages.  Given this understanding, the mobile nodes should be able
   to use the same authentication mechanisms based on their IP addresses
   as they would have used otherwise.







Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 33]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


12. IANA Considerations

   AODV defines a "Type" field for messages sent to port 654.  A new
   registry has been created for the values for this Type field, and the
   following values have been assigned:

      Message Type                    Value
      ---------------------------     -----
      Route Request (RREQ)            1
      Route Reply (RREP)              2
      Route Error (RERR)              3
      Route-Reply Ack (RREP-ACK)      4

   AODV control messages can have extensions.  Currently, only one
   extension is defined.  A new registry has been created for the Type
   field of the extensions:

      Extension Type                  Value
      ---------------------------     -----
      Hello Interval                  1

   Future values of the Message Type or Extension Type can be allocated
   using standards action [2].

13. IPv6 Considerations

   See [6] for detailed operation for IPv6.  The only changes to the
   protocol are that the address fields are enlarged.

14. Acknowledgments

   Special thanks to Ian Chakeres, UCSB, for his extensive suggestions
   and contributions to recent revisions.

   We acknowledge with gratitude the work done at University of
   Pennsylvania within Carl Gunter's group, as well as at Stanford and
   CMU, to determine some conditions (especially involving reboots and
   lost RERRs) under which previous versions of AODV could suffer from
   routing loops.  Contributors to those efforts include Karthikeyan
   Bhargavan, Joshua Broch, Dave Maltz, Madanlal Musuvathi, and Davor
   Obradovic.  The idea of a DELETE_PERIOD, for which expired routes
   (and, in particular, the sequence numbers) to a particular
   destination must be maintained, was also suggested by them.

   We also acknowledge the comments and improvements suggested by Sung-
   Ju Lee (especially regarding local repair), Mahesh Marina, Erik
   Nordstrom (who provided text for section 6.11), Yves Prelot, Marc
   Mosko, Manel Guerrero Zapata, Philippe Jacquet, and Fred Baker.



Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 34]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


15. Normative References

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

   [2]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA
        Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October 1998.

16. Informative References

   [3]  Manner, J., et al., "Mobility Related Terminology", Work in
        Progress, July 2001.

   [4]  Karthikeyan Bhargavan, Carl A. Gunter, and Davor Obradovic.
        Fault Origin Adjudication.  In Proceedings of the Workshop on
        Formal Methods in Software Practice, Portland, OR, August 2000.

   [5]  IEEE 802.11 Committee, AlphaGraphics #35, 10201 N.35th Avenue,
        Phoenix AZ 85051.  Wireless LAN Medium Access Control MAC and
        Physical Layer PHY Specifications, June 1997.  IEEE Standard
        802.11-97.

   [6]  Perkins, C., Royer, E. and S. Das, "Ad hoc on demand distance
        vector (AODV) routing for ip version 6", Work in Progress.



























Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 35]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


17. Authors' Addresses

   Charles E. Perkins
   Communications Systems Laboratory
   Nokia Research Center
   313 Fairchild Drive
   Mountain View, CA 94303
   USA

   Phone: +1 650 625 2986
   Fax: +1 650 691 2170 (fax)
   EMail: Charles.Perkins@nokia.com


   Elizabeth M. Belding-Royer
   Department of Computer Science
   University of California, Santa Barbara
   Santa Barbara, CA 93106

   Phone: +1 805 893 3411
   Fax: +1 805 893 8553
   EMail: ebelding@cs.ucsb.edu


   Samir R. Das
   Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
   & Computer Science
   University of Cincinnati
   Cincinnati, OH 45221-0030

   Phone: +1 513 556 2594
   Fax: +1 513 556 7326
   EMail: sdas@ececs.uc.edu


















Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 36]

RFC 3561                      AODV Routing                     July 2003


18. Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003).  All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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.

Acknowledgement

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



















Perkins, et. al.              Experimental                     [Page 37]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.109, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/