[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]
Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Network Working Group M. Tuexen
Internet-Draft Muenster Univ. of Applied Sciences
Intended status: Standards Track R. Stewart
Expires: July 14, 2011 Huawei
January 10, 2011
UDP Encapsulation of SCTP Packets
draft-tuexen-sctp-udp-encaps-06.txt
Abstract
This document describes a simple method of encapsulating SCTP Packets
into UDP packets. This makes it possible to use SCTP in networks
with legacy NAT not supporting SCTP or implement SCTP on hosts
without directly accessing the IP-layer.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on July 14, 2011.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Tuexen & Stewart Expires July 14, 2011 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft UDP Encapsulation of SCTP Packets January 2011
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. General Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Internal EDP Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. External EDP Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Port Number Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Encapsulating Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Decapsulating Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Address Management of SCTP Endpoints . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
10. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Tuexen & Stewart Expires July 14, 2011 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft UDP Encapsulation of SCTP Packets January 2011
1. Introduction
This document describes a simple method of encapsulating SCTP packets
into UDP packets. SCTP is defined in [RFC4960]. There are two main
reasons for this:
o Allow SCTP traffic to pass legacy NATs, which do not provide
native SCTP support as specified in [I-D.ietf-behave-sctpnat] and
[I-D.stewart-natsupp-tsvwg].
o Allow SCTP to be implemented on hosts which do not provide direct
access to the IP-layer. In particular, applications can use their
own SCTP implementation if the operating system does not provide
one.
2. Conventions
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
3. Architecture
3.1. General Considerations
The basic architecture is shown in the following figure.
+----------------+ +----------------+
| Encapsulating/ | | Encapsulating/ |
+-| Decapsulating |---| Decapsulating |-+
| | Point | | Point | |
+----------+ | +----------------+ +----------------+ | +----------+
| |-+ +-| |
| SCTP | | SCTP |
| Endpoint | | Endpoint |
| |-+ +-| |
+----------+ | +----------------+ +----------------+ | +----------+
| | Encapsulating/ | | Encapsulating/ | |
+-| Decapsulating |---| Decapsulating |-+
| Point | | Point |
+----------------+ +----------------+
On each path there is a pair of encapsulating/decapsulating points
(EDPs). When the left SCTP endpoint sends an SCTP packet to the
right SCTP endpoint, the first EDP on the path encapsulates the SCTP
packet and the second EDP decapsulates it. Between the EDP a UDP
Tuexen & Stewart Expires July 14, 2011 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft UDP Encapsulation of SCTP Packets January 2011
packet is sent which can be processed by legacy NATs. The EDPs on
different paths do not need to be synchronized.
3.2. Internal EDP Considerations
TBD.
3.3. External EDP Considerations
TBD.
4. Port Number Table
Every EDP maintains an encapsulating table (ET) where each row
consists of the following entries:
1. Source Address
2. Source Port
3. Destination Address
4. Destination Port
5. Time Stamp
Please note that the port numbers in the ET are used to build the UDP
header while encapsulating. A row SHOULD be deleted when the time
stamp is older than T1 seconds. The default value for T1 is 300
seconds.
5. Encapsulating Procedures
When an EDP has to encapsulate an SCTP packet it looks up the source
and destination port number in the row with matching source and
destination addresses of the ET. If no matching row is found, the
IANA registered value 9899 is used for the source and destination
port as the result of the lookup procedure. If a matching row was
found, the time stamp of that row is set to the current time.
The EDP inserts then an UDP header between the IP and SCTP header of
the SCTP packet using the source port and the destination port from
the above lookup procedure. Furthermore the length and the checksum
field of the UDP header have to be set accordingly. Finally the IP
header is updated to indicate that it now encapsulates an UDP packet.
Tuexen & Stewart Expires July 14, 2011 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft UDP Encapsulation of SCTP Packets January 2011
6. Decapsulating Procedures
When an EDT has to decapsulate an SCTP packet, it removes the UDP
header from the packet. The IP header is updated to indicate that it
now encapsulates an SCTP packet. If the source and destination port
numbers are not both equal to 9899, the EDP performs a lookup in the
ET to find a row with the source address of the packet being the
destination address in the row and the destination address of the
packet being the source address in the row. If such a row is found,
the port numbers are updated. If no row is found, a new one is
created using the addresses and the port numbers from the packet by
exchanging the source and destination information. In both cases the
time stamp of the row is set to the current time.
7. Address Management of SCTP Endpoints
To allow seamless legacy NAT traversal the SCTP endpoints MUST follow
the address management procedures described in
[I-D.ietf-behave-sctpnat]
8. IANA Considerations
This document does not require any actions from IANA.
9. Security Considerations
This section is not complete yet.
10. Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank Irene Ruengeler for her invaluable
comments.
11. References
11.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC4960] Stewart, R., "Stream Control Transmission Protocol",
RFC 4960, September 2007.
Tuexen & Stewart Expires July 14, 2011 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft UDP Encapsulation of SCTP Packets January 2011
11.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-behave-sctpnat]
Stewart, R., Tuexen, M., and I. Ruengeler, "Stream Control
Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Network Address Translation",
draft-ietf-behave-sctpnat-04 (work in progress),
December 2010.
[I-D.stewart-natsupp-tsvwg]
Stewart, R., Tuexen, M., and I. Ruengeler, "Stream Control
Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Network Address Translation
Support", draft-stewart-natsupp-tsvwg-01 (work in
progress), June 2010.
Authors' Addresses
Michael Tuexen
Muenster University of Applied Sciences
Stegerwaldstr. 39
48565 Steinfurt
Germany
Email: tuexen@fh-muenster.de
Randall R. Stewart
Huawei
Chapin, SC 29036
USA
Email: randall@lakerest.net
Tuexen & Stewart Expires July 14, 2011 [Page 6]
Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from
https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/