Rfc And Internet Standards Presentation Pptx Slideshare

Advanced Lecture on Internet Applications 12 Standardization RFC - Slides: 64 Advanced Lecture on Internet Applications 12. Standardization, RFC, Operation, Implementation, Protocol Design Masataka Ohta mohta@necom 830. hpcl. titech. ac. jp ftp: //ftp. hpcl. titech. ac. jp/appli 12 e. ppt Culture Politics Economy Application Layer Transport Layer Network Layer Datalink Layer Physical Layering Structure over the Internet and Standardization De Jure Standard and De Facto Standard • de jure Standard – specified by standardization organization formally recognized as such by countries through, e. g.

, international treaty • ITU • ISO(IEC) • de facto Standard – naturally grown standard • compared to De Jure Standard – many de facto standardization organizations (forum) exist • sometimes called forum standards WTO (World Trade Organization) Agreement • non-tariff barrier and standardization – too many standards worsens interoperability of products – “international standards” must be respected not less than domestic standards to promote international competitions How International Standards Enforced • The WTO Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade – 2.

4 Where technical regulations are required and relevant international standards exist or their completion is imminent, Members shall use them, or the relevant parts of them, as a basis for their technical regulations except when such international standards or relevant parts would be an ineffective or inappropriate means for the fulfillment of the legitimate objectives pursued, for instance because of fundamental climatic or geographical factors or fundamental technological problems. What is “International Standards” of WTO? • standards specified by international body or system – 4.

International body or system • Body or system whose membership is open to the relevant bodies of at least all Members.

– “Member” means member countries and territories of WTO – private companies may also be a member International Standardization Organization: ISO • ISO does NOT stands for “International Standardization Organization” – pronounced as “aiso” • members are countries • specify standards in various areas – including standards for computers such as computer languages and character codes International Standardization Organization on Electricity: IEC • International Electrotechnical Commission • mostly merged with ISO – electric (computer) standards are published as ISO/IEC standards International Standardization Organization on Telecommunication: ITU • International Telecommunication Union • specialized agency of UN (United Nations) – Members are countries • has three sectors (ITU-T, ITU-R, ITU-D) – private company can be a sector member – actual work done in SG (Study Group) ITU-T • originally named CCITT (International Coordinating Committee for Telephony and Telegraphy, Comite Consultatif International Telegraphique et Telephonique) • standardize telecommunication – issued as ITU-T Recommendation • standardize DSL and optical fiber ITU-R • assign radio wave resources ITU-D • help developing countries Rise of Forum Standards • forum can be created relatively easily • de jure standardization organizations are slow to move – needs too much time for standardization • forum become leader of standardization • de jure standardization organizations revised their process – AAP (Alternate Approval Process) of ITU-T • minimum duration for standardization is a half year Standardization Forums Related to the Internet • IETF – naturally grown from DARPA research project – specify internet standard – mostly concentrate on network layer and above • W 3 C is for web at application layer • IEEE – academic society of US – datalink and physical layers of Ethernet, Wifi, etc.

Application Layer (W 3 C) Transport Layer IETF Network Layer Datalink Layer Physical Layer IEEE Major Forum Standards for the Internet IETF and Standardization for Internet Technolocies • internet is a result of a DARPA project • results (protocol standards) are published as RFCs (Request for Comments) • later, standardization organization of IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) established • after that, an international organization of ISOC (Internet Society) was incorporated as a upper organization BTW, What is the Internet?

Not e-mail – seriously thought so 20 years ago • Not web, either – many still misunderstand so • Is not applications • The Internet is a network directly connecting terminals based on the principle of the Internet using IP (Internet Protocol) End to End Principle • implement functions by terminals (ends) not by the network – network equipment has only single function (to connect terminals) and is high speed • implement functions by directly involved terminals without involving other terminals – scalable (no load concentration) – highly reliable (system works if only terminals are working and can communicate each other over some route) End to End Principle and Standardization • in networks supporting lots of functions – the functions must be provided by whole network • standardization is essencially important • in the internet – new functions are supported by end systems – standardizations are, primarily, unnecessary – standardizations on network functions are still important • network layer (IP, address, routing, Qo.

S, multicast, etc. ) and below Structure of Internet Standardization IAB IANA →ICANN IESG RFC editor ISOC (Internet SOCiety) • international academic society for internet • was consists from paying individual members • annual plenary was INET – held around the world • at Yokohama in 2000 • www. isoc.

org Role of ISOC • incorporated in 1992 as organization above IAB • initial by-laws: RFC 2135 • responsible for legal/organizational matters • finiancial support for IETF • choose IAB (and IESG) members • coordination with ITU • operated by the board of trustees Structure of Internet Standardization IAB IANA →ICANN IESG RFC editor What is IETF • group to discuss standards related to IP • established in 1986 under IAB • no formal membership • decision making by “rough consensus” • 8 areas (Applications, Internet, Operations and Management, Routing, Security, Sub-IP, Transport, User Services), and 133 working groups (Jan.

02) • three meetings in a year (was twice in US) 2001, july Structure of a WG (Working Group) Area Director WG Chair(s) WG Editor(s) remaining others Bo.

Fs Held in 52 nd at Saltlake IRNSS OPS-NM INCH INTLOC ROI OPES MPLSOAM NDMP DCP DNSMEAS NMSEC IEPREP CDI IPPT Internet Resource Name Search Service Configuration Management requirements BOF Extended Incident Handling BOF Internationalization and Localization of Internet Protocols BOF RDMA over the Internet Protocol Suite BOF Open Pluggable Edge Services BOF MPLS Maintenance Mechanisms Network Data Management Protocol BOF Datagram Control Protocol BOF DNS Research Measurements BOF Security Requirements for Management Protocols BOF Internet Emergency Preparedness BOF Content Distribution Internetworking BOF IP Path Tracing BOF RFC (Request For Comments) • formal documents for the internet (not necessarily standards) • idenfitied by serial numbers (RFCxxxx) • various types – Informational – Standard Track – Best Current Practice – For Your Information – Historic Standardization Process for RFCs others external standards IETF Internet-Draft Experimental RFC IESG Approval Proposed Standard Draft Standard Informational RFC BCP Internet Standard Historic RFC (Best Current Practice) FYI Number BCP Number STD Number Standard track Requirements for Standardization Process from Proposed Standard (PS) to Draft Standard (DS) • at least 6 months passed after PS • existence of two or more independent implimentations • enough operational experiences from Draft Standard (DS) to Internet Standard • at least 4 months passed after DS • have IETF meeting at least once after becoming DS • enough operational experiences Structure of Internet Standardization IAB IANA →ICANN IESG RFC editor Role of IESG • manage activities of IETF – establish/deestablish WGs • manage internet standard process • final approval for internet standards Members of IESG (at 2000 or so) http: //www.

html • IETF Chair • Routing Area (rtg) – Harald Alvestrand – Bill Fenner • Applications Area (app) • Security Area (sec) – Patrik Faltstrom – Ned Freed • Internet Area (int) – Erik Nordmark – Thomas Narten • Operations & Management Area (ops) – Randy Bush – Bert Wijnen – Jeff Schiller – Marcus Leech • Transport Area (tsv) – Scott Bradner – Allison Mankin • User Services Area (usv) – April Marine • Temporary Sub-IP Area (sub) – Scott Bradner – Bert Wijnen Structure of Internet Standardization IAB IANA →ICANN IESG RFC editor Role of IAB (rfc 2850) • approve IESG members, designate IETF chair – from a list created by IETF nominating committee • • • architectural oversight standards process oversight and appeal RFC Series and IANA ISOC liaison external liaison Charter of the Internet Architecture Board (IAB) , RFC 1601から History of IAB 1979 1982 1986 1992 ARPA established ICCB (Internet Configuration Control Board) restructured as IAB(Internet Activities Board) IETF established under IAB incorporate ISOC above IAB and rename as Internet Architecture Board Members of IAB • Harald Alvestrand (IETF/IESG Chair) Harald@alvestrand.

no • Ran Atkinson rja@extremenetworks. co m • Rob Austein sra@hactrn. net • Fred Baker fred@cisco. com • Brian Carpenter brian@icair. org • Steve Bellovin (Liaison to the IESG) smb@research. att. com • Jon Crowcroft J. Crowcroft@cs. ucl. ac. uk • Leslie Daigle (IAB Executive Director) leslie@thinkingcat. com • Steve Deering deering@cisco. com • Sally Floyd floyd@aciri. org • Geoff Huston gih@telstra. net • John Klensin (IAB Chair) klensin+iab@jck. com • Henning Schulzrinne hgs@cs. columbia. edu EX OFFICIO AND LIAISON • Erik Nordmark (Liaison from the IESG) Erik. Nordmark@eng. sun.

com • Erik Huizer (IRTF Chair) irtf-chair@cs. twente. nl • Joyce K. Reynolds (Liaison from the RFC Editor) jkrey@rfc-editor. org • Lynn St. Amour (Liason from ISOC) st. amour@isoc.

org Selection of IAB/IESG Members ISOC rov e IAB Member List (draft) IAB Nominating Committee dr aft IESG Member List (draft) ap pr ov e Bord of Trustees app IESG Selection System ISOC Membership ISOC Nomcom ISOC Trustees ISOC President IETF Community IETF Nomcom IAB IRSG IESG How Nominating Committee Members are Selected Nominating Committee ISOC • president designate Non-voting chair 10 voting volunteers randomly select 10 members from publicly sought volunteers IETF attendees 2 non-voting liasons recommendation by IAB and Chair those who have attended 2 IETF meegins from last 3 IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Committees, RFC 2027 Reference Matrials on IETF Standardization • Masataka Ohta, “IETF and Internet Standard”, IEEE Communications Magazine, Sep.

1998 • “The Tao of IETF -- A Guide for New Attendees of the Internet Engineering Task Force”, http: //www. ietf. org/tao. html • S. Bradner, “The Internet Standards Process --Rev. 3”, BCP 9, RFC 2026 • J. Galvin, “IAB and IESG Selection, Confirmation, and Recall Process: Operation of the Nominating and Recall Comittees”, BCP 10, RFC 2282 Structure of ISOC and IETF ISOC-Bo.

T IAB (Internet Architecture Board) IESG (Internet Engineering Steering Group) WG (Working Group) IRTF (Internet Research Task Force) RFC Editor IANA IANA • Internet Assigned Number Authority • maintain assignment numbers used by protocols – IP version (4, 6, . . . ), protocol (6 for tcp, 17 for UDP, . . . ), default port #(20 for ftp, 25 for smtp, 80 for http, etc.

), IP address (delegated to RIRs (Regional Internet Registries), domain names (delegated to TLD (Top Level Domain) registries) Concession of DNS • domain names are managed by IANA – located at USC (University of South California) – supported by USG – delegate managements to network solutions • became so profitable to network solutions – $50/year for a domain name with poor service quality IAHC (International Ad-Hoc Committee) • international framework to manage domain names necessary • members from ISOC, ITU, WIPO, WTA • DNS registry is by nonprofit organization – registrar business is open to any – deprive network solutions of profitable business • network solutions lobbied – USG acted against ICANN • organization created by USG instead of IAHC • registration business of TLDs is monopolized by private companies • govern internet in general?

Running Code and Rough Concensus • existence of implementations is important – multiple interoperable independent implementations • can remove ambiguities and inconsistencies – can improve specification by feedback from implementations – specifications worked by many implementers • meant good quality, before commercialization • means profitability for large vendors Existence of Implementations are Important, but, • uncritically implement any specification – keeps poor specification poor, resulting in poor implementation • uncritically operate any implementation – keeps poor implementation poor, resulting in poor operation • finally rejected by end users – too much time is wasted ignorance (no running code) poor specification good implementor effort poor implementation ignorance effort good operator ignorance bad implementor bad operator poor operation end users : proper feedback : no feedback to poor specifications Current (?

) State of IETF • lead by big vendors and ISPs by commercialization – difficult to make decisions if parties with conflicting interests exist • no voting, no concluding result • other standardization bodies – modify process for quick standardization • discussion of modification – difficult to reach concensus IEEE • The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers • IEEE-SA takes care of standardization – on Electrical and Electronics matters • including lower layers of ICT – private and company members IEEE Standard • in general, for sale • 802 standards becomes free 6 months after publication – including Ethernet and Wifi ones • some member moved from IETF to IEEE – as Ethernet and Wifi development became hot Standards and IPR (Intellectural Property Right) • technology protected by one’s IPR (patent) – beneficial if used as optional part of standard • even more beneficial if mandated part – standard is less attractive » must pay licensing fee or licensing may be rejected • usually.

standardization bodies – mandate their members inform existence of IPR and offer fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND, RAND) licensing – not effective against non-members • submarine patents can be very harmful Joining International Standardization Activities • as a formal delegate of a country • as a member of lower level bodies – e. g.

sector member of ITU sector • through domestic standardization bodies – JIS for ISO, TTC for ITU • attendance to many meetings important – though, these days, mailing list discussions are common Forum Standardization Activities • as a company member of a forum • as a private member of a forum – politics is often more important than technology • to be known by many others by repeatedly attending meetings • often hide real intentions – old forums may be inflexible • may create a forum by yourself How to Create a Forum • solicit members (hopefully, internationally) – famous researchers – riches (rich companies) • provide secretariat office – may be out sourced • formulate rules • hold an opening meeting • may incorporate Example of a Forum: Mobile Broadband Association • established Aug.

2001, incorporated Dec. 2009 – www. mobile-broadband. org – was with 28 full, 2 associate and 32 individual members • to promote mobile broadband • annual fee for full member: 120, 000 JPY – operation by volunteers • standardize really secure/quick 802 (wifi) – used by some and modified to be IEEE 802. 11 ai home address application IP Mobility Correspondent Host key application Home Agent TCP/UDP security 3. decrypted result security IP assign care of address Wifi datalink Wifi physical RADIUS server wired wireless 1.

encrypted session key NIC link security IP address key NIC 2. ask decryption of session key IP IP home address 4.

address assignment key care of address link security key Wifi datalink Wifi physical mobile host wireless base station initial stage of mobile internet service (authentication, share session key, assign address) Wrap Up • standardization is important for interoperable products • standards may be specified standardization bodies or naturally grown • there a lot of standardization bodies • to make and spread good protocols – early feedback from implementers important • commercialization often makes it difficult

People Also Asked

• RFC and internet standards presentation | PPTX - SlideShare
• PPT - Internet RFC PowerPoint Presentation, free download - ID:8744787
• PPTIETF Structure and Internet Standards Process
• Advanced Lecture on Internet Applications 12 Standardization RFC
• Request For Comments (RFC) | PDF - SlideShare
• PPT - Improving RFC Presentation and Management: Enhancing ...
• RFC and Internet Standards by Daniel Baez - Prezi