draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-sctp-01.txt   draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-sctp-02.txt 
Network Working Group X. Fu Network Working Group X. Fu
Internet-Draft C. Dickmann Internet-Draft C. Dickmann
Expires: September 5, 2007 University of Goettingen Expires: May 21, 2008 University of Goettingen
J. Crowcroft J. Crowcroft
University of Cambridge University of Cambridge
March 4, 2007 November 18, 2007
General Internet Signaling Transport (GIST) over SCTP General Internet Signaling Transport (GIST) over SCTP
draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-sctp-01.txt draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-sctp-02.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
skipping to change at page 1, line 36 skipping to change at page 1, line 36
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 5, 2007. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 21, 2008.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Abstract Abstract
The General Internet Signaling Transport (GIST) protocol currently The General Internet Signaling Transport (GIST) protocol currently
uses TCP or TLS over TCP for connection mode operation. This uses TCP or TLS over TCP for connection mode operation. This
document describes the usage of GIST over the Stream Control document describes the usage of GIST over the Stream Control
skipping to change at page 2, line 25 skipping to change at page 2, line 25
3.1.2. Protocol-Definition: Forwards-SCTP . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1.2. Protocol-Definition: Forwards-SCTP . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. Effect on GIST State Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.2. Effect on GIST State Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3. PR-SCTP Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.3. PR-SCTP Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.4. API between GIST and NSLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.4. API between GIST and NSLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.4.1. SendMessage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.4.1. SendMessage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.4.2. NetworkNotification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.4.2. NetworkNotification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Bit-Level Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Bit-Level Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. MA-Protocol-Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.1. MA-Protocol-Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Application of GIST over SCTP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Application of GIST over SCTP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1. Multi-homing support of SCTP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1. Multi-homing support of SCTP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.2. Streaming support in SCTP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 10 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document describes the usage of the General Internet Signaling This document describes the usage of the General Internet Signaling
Transport (GIST) protocol [1] over the Stream Control Transmission Transport (GIST) protocol [1] over the Stream Control Transmission
Protocol (SCTP) [2]. Protocol (SCTP) [2].
GIST, in its initial specification for connection mode operation, GIST, in its initial specification for connection mode operation,
runs on top of a byte-stream oriented transport protocol providing a runs on top of a byte-stream oriented transport protocol providing a
reliable, in-sequence delivery, i.e., using the Transmission Control reliable, in-sequence delivery, i.e., using the Transmission Control
skipping to change at page 8, line 6 skipping to change at page 8, line 6
association, it most likely is also for the IP traffic that is association, it most likely is also for the IP traffic that is
signaled for. Thus, GIST would need to perform a refresh anyway to signaled for. Thus, GIST would need to perform a refresh anyway to
cope with the route change. Nevertheless, the use of the multi- cope with the route change. Nevertheless, the use of the multi-
homing support of SCTP provides GIST and the NSLP with another source homing support of SCTP provides GIST and the NSLP with another source
to detect route changes. Furthermore, for the time between detection to detect route changes. Furthermore, for the time between detection
of the route change and recovering from it, the alternative path of the route change and recovering from it, the alternative path
offered by SCTP can be used by the NSLP to make the transition more offered by SCTP can be used by the NSLP to make the transition more
smoothly. Finally, future MRMs might have different properties and smoothly. Finally, future MRMs might have different properties and
therefore benefit from multi-homing more broadly. therefore benefit from multi-homing more broadly.
5.2. Streaming support in SCTP
Streaming support in SCTP is advantageous for GIST. It allows better
parallel processing, in particular by avoiding head of line blocking
issue in TCP. Since a same GIST MA may be reused by multiple
sessions, using TCP as transport GIST signaling messages belonging to
different sessions may be blocked if another message is dropped. In
the case of SCTP, this can be avoided as different sessions having
different requirements can belong to different streams, thus a
message loss or reordering in a stream will only affect the delivery
of messages within that particular stream, and not any other streams.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
The security considerations of both [1] and [2] apply. The security considerations of both [1] and [2] apply. For securing
GIST over SCTP channel, it is recommended to use DTLS [7], to take
the advantage of all the features provided by SCTP and its
extensions. DTLS over SCTP is currently being specified in [8]. The
usage of DTLS for GIST is similar to TLS for GIST as specified in
[1], and a MA-protocol-ID for DTLS is yet to be defined in another
document.
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
A new MA-Protocol-ID (Forwards-SCTP) needs to be assigned, with a A new MA-Protocol-ID (Forwards-SCTP) needs to be assigned, with a
recommended value of 3. recommended value of 3.
8. Acknowledgments 8. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank John Loughney, Robert Hancock, Andrew The authors would like to thank John Loughney, Robert Hancock, Andrew
McDonald, Fang-Chun Kuo and Jan Demter for their helpful suggestions. McDonald, Fang-Chun Kuo and Jan Demter for their helpful suggestions.
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[1] Schulzrinne, H. and R. Hancock, "GIST: General Internet [1] Schulzrinne, H. and R. Hancock, "GIST: General Internet
Signalling Transport", draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-12 (work in Signalling Transport", draft-ietf-nsis-ntlp-14 (work in
progress), March 2007. progress), July 2007.
[2] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Morneault, K., Sharp, C., Schwarzbauer, [2] Stewart, R., "Stream Control Transmission Protocol", RFC 4960,
H., Taylor, T., Rytina, I., Kalla, M., Zhang, L., and V. Paxson, September 2007.
"Stream Control Transmission Protocol", RFC 2960, October 2000.
[3] Stewart, R., Ramalho, M., Xie, Q., Tuexen, M., and P. Conrad, [3] Stewart, R., Ramalho, M., Xie, Q., Tuexen, M., and P. Conrad,
"Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Partial Reliability "Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP) Partial Reliability
Extension", RFC 3758, May 2004. Extension", RFC 3758, May 2004.
[4] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement [4] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[5] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7, RFC 793, [5] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7, RFC 793,
September 1981. September 1981.
[6] Hancock, R., Karagiannis, G., Loughney, J., and S. Van den [6] Hancock, R., Karagiannis, G., Loughney, J., and S. Van den
Bosch, "Next Steps in Signaling (NSIS): Framework", RFC 4080, Bosch, "Next Steps in Signaling (NSIS): Framework", RFC 4080,
June 2005. June 2005.
[7] Rescorla, E. and N. Modadugu, "Datagram Transport Layer
Security", RFC 4347, April 2006.
[8] Tuexen, M. and E. Rescorla, "Datagram Transport Layer Security
for Stream Control Transmission Protocol",
draft-tuexen-dtls-for-sctp-02 (work in progress), November 2007.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Xiaoming Fu Xiaoming Fu
University of Goettingen University of Goettingen
Institute for Informatics Institute for Informatics
Lotzestr. 16-18 Lotzestr. 16-18
Goettingen 37083 Goettingen 37083
Germany Germany
Email: fu@cs.uni-goettingen.de Email: fu@cs.uni-goettingen.de
 End of changes. 12 change blocks. 
12 lines changed or deleted 37 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.34. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/