Browse Prior Art Database

INFN Requirements for an IPng (RFC1676)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000002513D
Original Publication Date: 1994-Aug-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-12
Document File: 4 page(s) / 8K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

A. Ghiselli: AUTHOR [+3]

Abstract

This white paper is sent by INFN network team, the Italian National Institute for nuclear physics, whose network, named INFNet, is a nationwide network founded to provide the access to existing national and international HEP laboratory and to facilitate communications between the researchers. With this paper we would like to emphasize the key points that we would to consider if charged with IPng plan. We do not really expect to add original items to the selection, but we think that it could be useful to submit the opinions and ideas that come from our network experience.

This text was extracted from a ASCII Text document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 37% of the total text.

Network Working Group A. Ghiselli

Request for Comments: 1676 D. Salomoni

Category: Informational C. Vistoli

INFN/CNAF

August 1994

INFN Requirements for an IPng

Status of this Memo

This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo

does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of

this memo is unlimited.

Overview

This document was submitted to the IETF IPng area in response to RFC

1550. Publication of this document does not imply acceptance by the

IPng area of any ideas expressed within. Comments should be

submitted to the big-internet@munnari.oz.au mailing list.

Abstract

This white paper is sent by INFN network team, the Italian National

Institute for nuclear physics, whose network, named INFNet, is a

nationwide network founded to provide the access to existing national

and international HEP laboratory and to facilitate communications

between the researchers. With this paper we would like to emphasize

the key points that we would to consider if charged with IPng plan.

We do not really expect to add original items to the selection, but

we think that it could be useful to submit the opinions and ideas

that come from our network experience.

1. General Requirements

The problems that are to be solved in IP internet are mainly three:

1. address exhaustion

2. flat address space

3. routing efficiency, flexibility and capacity.

The aim of IPng study should be to define a plan that solves all

these problems as a whole and not each of them separately.

The general requirements that we underline for this transition are:

- transparency to the final user: user applications should not be

influenced.

- flexibility: Simplify the suitability to new communication

technology and to topology changes due to new services provided

or to different users needs.

2. Application and Transport Level

Starting from the top of the OSI model, we think that the users

applications should not be influenced by the migration plan. It

means that the TCP (the transport layer) must maintain the same

interfaces and services to the upper layers. Anyway, it is also

necessary to foresee the use of a different transport services. The

possibility to use different transport should be offered to the

applications. Therefore a transport selector field is needed.

3. Network layer: service and address

We assume that the network layer must continue to provide the same

datagram service as IP does. CLNS could be a solution and a reliable

starting point for the IPng. The main advantage is that this

solution has been profitable tested and it is already available on

many systems. It is not, of course, deployed as...