Simpson, W., "IP in IP Tunneling", RFC 1853, October 1995. Author's Address Questions about this memo can be directed to:  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....creating a market in which network owners or operators provide network access to third parties through VPNs. A VPN user may obtain their connectivity directly, for example by leased lines or virtual circuits in a carrier s network, or else they can make use of encapsulation techniques to tunnel [Simpson95] over some other network (typically the Internet ) Often a combination of the two is used in a corporate VPN the main sites may be connected by virtual circuits, with individual employees gaining access through their local Internet service provider (ISP) One advantage of a tunnelled VPN is ....

W. Simpson. IP in IP Tunneling. RFC 1853, October 1995. (p 2)

....the Ack fusion algorithm in the next subsection. FNs also take care of duplicate acknowledgments from receivers. Thus, the TCP sender receives a single acknowledgment as it would expect. Figure 2 illustrates this mechanism with an example. Acknowledgment packets at the receiver are encapsulated [Sim95] and sent to the parent address. Encapsulation is required because the FNs must know the address of the TCP M source in order to perform Ack fusion. To ease lookups, we can choose to use a number unassigned in [RP94] for the Protocol field in encapsulated IP packets e.g. 105 and call it ....

W. Simpson. IP in IP Tunneling. RFU 1853, October 1995.

....handles this problem using Mobility Agents. Mobility agents keep track of mobile hosts and are responsible for routing packets to them. Agents, however, use static IP [Pos81] for routing their packets. Mobile IP is simple in the sense that it uses the existing mechanisms of IP Encapsulation [Sim95, Per96a, Per96c], ICMP messages [Dee91] and ARP [Plu82] Mobile IP uses static IP routing, but leaves the latter completely unaffected. Overview of Mobile IP: In Mobile IP [Per96b] a source sending a packet to a mobile M sends the packet to a fixed IP address for M. Because of the way IP routing works, this ....

....an agent crashes and its peer takes over for it, the mobile notices no change except for a small discontinuity in its packets. Simplicity and Compatibility: Our protocol adheres to the simple design philosophy of mobile IP. We continue to use existing mechanisms in mobile IP like IP Encapsulation [Sim95, Per96a, Per96c], ICMP [Dee91] and ARP [Plu82] We use the existing Registration Request and Reply messages to distribute mobility bindings among agent peers. Finally, an agent uses TCP [Ste94, WS94] to obtain its bindings when it comes up after a crash (see Section 2 for details) Gratuitous ARP is used by an ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

W. Simpson. IP in IP Tunneling. RFC 1853, October 1995.

....these nodes will have to respond very often to join or delete requests, and to changes in the load or connectivity of the underlying network. This burden can be significantly 1 It is assumed that all network nodes have multicast routing capability. 1 reduced using the concept of tunneling [19] as follows. The multicast packets are routed over a tree formed by a collection of multicast links (tunnels) where each multicast link is a simple unicast route. The intermediate nodes of each multicast link do not have to maintain routing information for the multicast tree, because they are ....

W. Simpson. IP in IP tunneling. RFC-1853, October 1995.

....that thesis are summarised in Chapter 1 Section 2. CHAMELEON A System for Adaptive QoS Provisioning Chapter 1 : Introduction Page 15 of 97 A lot of work has also been done in the area of protocol tunnelling. Most of this work concentrates on tunnelling various protocols within the IP protocol [2,24,55,58]. However, work has also been done to use PPP as the tunnelling protocol [56,57] There have been a number of initiatives to provide QoS guarantees over IP. These include protocols like RSVP [27] and architectures like Differentiated Services [26,42] There are also other methods that use ....

W. Simpson, "IP in IP Tunneling", RFC1853

....upon the first issue: establishing opaque network layer connectivity be2 tween the various sites of an Intranet Extranet VPN. The main mechanism for establishing such connectivity is the creation of tunnels. There is a range of choices for such tunnels, including IP tunnels (using IP over IP[11], IPsec[7] or GRE[6] ATM VCs, and MPLS. Generally, there are two approaches for establishing such tunnels [5] the CPE based approach and the network based approach . In a CPE based approach, tunnels are established only between the CPE devices (mainly border routers) In a network based ....

W. Simpson. IP in IP tunneling. RFC-1853, October 1995.

....a tunnel header. If tunnel endpoints are confined to the network edge, then one can simply sample consistently in the network interior. Otherwise, in some types of tunnel the original header could be recovered from the tunnel payload through appropriate offsetting; see e.g. IP in IP Tunneling [26] and Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) 6] In the case of MPLS, tunnels (label switched paths) can be nested by prepending the packet with several stacked labels [28] The bottom label is identified by a bottom of stack flag. As the labels are of fixed size, the logic to eliminate labels until ....

W. Simpson. RFC 1853, IP in IP Tunneling. available at ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1853.txt, 1995. 14

....include the Identification eld (bits 32 47) The presence of tunneling will impact packet identity through encapsulation behind a tunnel header. In some types of tunnel the original header could be recovered from the tunnel payload upon through appropriate o setting; see e.g. IP in IP Tunneling [23] and Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) 6] This approach lets us match up samples inside and outside the tunnel. If tunnel endpoints are con ned to the network edge, then one can simply sample consistently in the network interior. Flags (bits 48 51) and Fragment Offset (bits 52 63) are ....

W. Simpson. RFC 1853, IP in IP Tunneling. available at ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1853.txt, 1995.

....a tunnel header. If tunnel endpoints are confined to the network edge, then one can simply sample consistently in the network interior. Otherwise, in some types of tunnel the original header could be recovered from the tunnel payload through appropriate offsetting; see e.g. IP in IP Tunneling [25] and Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) 6] In the case of MPLS, tunnels (label switched paths) can be nested by prepending the packet with several stacked labels [27] The bottom label is identified by a bottom of stack flag. As the labels are of fixed size, the logic to eliminate labels until ....

W. Simpson. RFC 1853, IP in IP Tunneling. available at ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1853.txt, 1995.

....of the rerouting process that we propose. We will employ an alternative technical mechanism, called simple alternate routing, in which we assume that the network has the ability to implement IP tunneling between border nodes, i.e. the network has the ability to perform IP in IP encapsulation [43]. Thus, we do not require or assume that the algorithms for flow redirection need to cooperate with the underlying (slowly varying) routing protocol. Prior work on QoS routing has focused primarily on mechanisms for ensuring QoS to unaggregated flows. Dynamic routing schemes, such as Dynamic ....

W. Simpson. IP in IP Tunneling, October 1995. Internet RFC 1853.

....of the rerouting process that we propose. We will employ an alternative technical mechanism, called simple alternate routing, in which we assume that the network has the ability to implement IP tunneling between border nodes, i.e. the network has the ability to perform IP in IP encapsulation [43]. Thus, we do not require or assume that the algorithms for flow redirection need to cooperate with the underlying (slowly varying) routing protocol. Prior work on QoS routing has focused primarily on mechanisms for ensuring QoS to unaggregated flows. Dynamic routing schemes, such as Dynamic ....

W. Simpson. IP in IP Tunneling, October 1995. Internet RFC 1853.

....the Identification field (bits 32 47) The presence of tunneling will impact packet identity through encapsulation behind a tunnel header. In some types of tunnel the original header could be recovered from the tunnel payload upon through appropriate offsetting; see e.g. IP in IP Tunneling [23] and Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) 6] This approach lets us match up samples inside and outside the tunnel. If tunnel endpoints are confined to the network edge, then one can simply sample consistently in the network interior. Flags (bits 48 51) and Fragment Offset (bits 52 63) are ....

W. Simpson. RFC 1853, IP in IP Tunneling. available at ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc1853.txt, 1995.

....of indirection are possible, to further aggregate state information and exploit routing refinement. Redirection across a multiple level hierarchy allows for a more scalable architecture and the isolation of policy between levels. The approach presented here is conceptually based on IP tunnels [SIM95]. At lower layers, other mechanisms such as ATM connections or MPLS paths [MPLS] may be employed to implement the tunnels. Although the above mechanism is used to map a virtual host address to a real one, the ef 4 fect to the outside world is the availability of virtual services, exactly because ....

W. Simpson, "IP in IP Tunneling," Internet RFC 1853, October 1995.

....of the rerouting process that we propose. We will employ an alternative technical mechanism, called alternate routing, in which we assume that the network has the ability to implement IP tunneling between border nodes, i.e. the network has the ability to perform IP in IP encapsulation [43]. Thus, we do not require or assume that the algorithms for flow redirection need to cooperate with the underlying (slowly varying) routing protocol. The purpose of this paper is to introduce and evaluate an alternate routing framework for aggregate QoS and to provide results from an initial ....

W. Simpson. IP in IP Tunneling, October 1995. Internet RFC 1853.

....private networks (VPN) 4] instead of leasing bandwidth on a single link, the service provider leases bandwidth on a path to an organization. The organization tunnels its VPN traffic through this path as if it was a single virtual link. Such Virtual Leased Links (VLL) may be realized by tunnels [5] and label switched paths in IP networks, and virtual paths in ATM networks. The notion of fair sharing of residual capacity naturally maps to the max min fair sharing [6] in the service provider s network 1 . Use of hierarchical packet fair queueing algorithms [1] to efficiently implement link ....

W. Simpson, "IP in IP tunneling," Oct. 1995, RFC 1853.

....C are branching points that have more than one immediate downstream receivers, B is a uni multicasting router that has only one immediate downstream receiver. C. 3 Tunnel Encapsulation Several encapsulation techniques can be used when sending data in the dynamic tunnels, namely IP in IP Tunneling [13], Generic Routing Encapsulation(GRE) 5] and Minimal Encapsulation within IP [10] Since the dynamic tunnels are expected to be used extensively, it is important to minimize the encapsulation overhead. Under this consideration, the Minimal Encapsulation within IP is selected as the default ....

W. Simpson. "IP in IP Tunneling". RFC 1853, October 1995.

....protection, while ESP adds confidentiality to the picture. IPsec can also be made to protect IP datagrams for other hosts. The IPsec endpoints in this arrangement thereby become security gateways and take part in a virtual private network (VPN) where ordinary IP packets are tunneled inside IPsec [36]. Network layer security has a number of very important advantages over security at other layers of the protocol stack. Network layer protocols are generally hidden from applications, which can therefore automatically and transparently take advantage of whatever network layer encryption services ....

William Simpson. IP in IP Tunneling. Internet RFC 1853, October 1995.

....the Ack fusion algorithm in the next subsection. FNs also take care of duplicate acknowledgments from receivers. Thus, the TCP sender receives a single acknowledgment as it would expect. Figure 2 illustrates this mechanism with an example. Acknowledgment packets at the receiver are encapsulated [Sim95] and sent to the parent address. Encapsulation is required because the FNs must know the address of the TCP M source in order to perform Ack fusion. To ease lookups, we can choose to use a number unassigned in [RP94] for the P rotocol field in encapsulated IP packets e.g. 105 and call it ....

W. Simpson. IP in IP Tunneling. RFC 1853, October 1995.

No context found.

Simpson, W., "IP in IP Tunneling", RFC 1853, October 1995. Author's Address Questions about this memo can be directed to:

No context found.

William Simpson. IP in IP Tunneling. Internet RFC 1853, October 1995.

No context found.

William Simpson. IP in IP Tunneling, October 1995. RFC 1853.

No context found.

Simpson, W., "IP in IP Tunneling", RFC 1853, October 1995.

No context found.

Simpson, W., "IP in IP Tunneling", RFC 1853, October 1995.

No context found.

Simpson, W., "IP in IP Tunneling", RFC 1853, October 1995.

No context found.

W. Simpson. IP in IP Tunneling. RFC 1853, 1995.

First 50 documents

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC