Network Working Group L. Sanchez
Request for Comments: 3139 Megisto
Category: Informational K. McCloghrie
Cisco
J. Saperia
JDS Consultant
June 2001
Network Working Group L. Sanchez
Request for Comments: 3139 Megisto
Category: Informational K. McCloghrie
Cisco
J. Saperia
JDS Consultant
June 2001
Requirements for Configuration Management of IP-based Networks
基于IP网络的配置管理要求
Status of this Memo
本备忘录的状况
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
本备忘录为互联网社区提供信息。它没有规定任何类型的互联网标准。本备忘录的分发不受限制。
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.
版权所有（C）互联网协会（2001年）。版权所有。
Abstract
摘要
This memo discusses different approaches to configure networks and identifies a set of configuration management requirements for IP-based networks.
本备忘录讨论了配置网络的不同方法，并确定了基于IP的网络的一组配置管理要求。
Table of Contents
目录
1.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1 Motivation, Scope and Goals of this document . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Requirements Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Audience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4 Definition of Technical Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.0 Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.0 Requirements for an IP-based Configuration Management System . 7
4.0 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Full Copyright Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1 Motivation, Scope and Goals of this document . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Requirements Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Audience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.4 Definition of Technical Terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.0 Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.0 Requirements for an IP-based Configuration Management System . 7
4.0 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Full Copyright Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
A number of IETF working groups have introduced new technologies which offer integrated and differentiated services. To support these new technologies, working group members found that they had new requirements for configuration of these technologies. One of these new requirements was for the provisioning (configuration) of behavior at the network level.
许多IETF工作组已经引入了新技术，这些新技术提供集成和差异化服务。为了支持这些新技术，工作组成员发现他们对这些技术的配置有新的要求。这些新要求之一是在网络级别提供（配置）行为。
An example of this type of configuration would be instructing all routers in a network to provide 'gold' service to a particular set of customers. Depending on the specific network equipment and definition of 'gold' service, this configuration request might translate to different configuration parameters on different vendors equipment and many individual configuration commands at the router. This higher level of configuration management has come to commonly be known as policy based management.
这种配置的一个例子是指示网络中的所有路由器向特定的客户群提供“黄金”服务。根据特定的网络设备和“黄金”服务的定义，此配置请求可能转换为不同供应商设备上的不同配置参数和路由器上的许多单独配置命令。这种更高级别的配置管理通常被称为基于策略的管理。
Working groups associated with these new technologies believed that the existing SNMP based management framework, while adequate for fault, configuration management at the individual instance (e.g., interface) level, performance and other management functions commonly associated with it, was not able to meet these new needs. As a result they began working on new solutions and approaches.
与这些新技术相关的工作组认为，现有的基于SNMP的管理框架虽然足以在单个实例（例如，接口）级别进行故障、配置管理、性能和其他通常与之相关的管理功能，但无法满足这些新需求。因此，他们开始研究新的解决方案和方法。
COPS [COPS] for RSVP [RSVP] provides routers with the opportunity to ask their Policy Server for an admit/reject decision for a particular RSVP session. This model allows routers to outsource their resource allocation decisions to some other entity. However, this model does not work with DiffServ [DSARCH] where there is no signalling protocol. Therefore, the policies that affect resource allocation decisions must be provisioned to the routers. It became evident that there was a need for coordinating both RSVP-based and DiffServ-based policies to provide end2end QoS. Working groups began to extend and leverage approaches such as COPS for RSVP to support Diffserv policies. This gave birth to COPS-PR [COPS-PR].
用于RSVP的COPS[COPS]为路由器提供了向其策略服务器请求特定RSVP会话的允许/拒绝决定的机会。该模型允许路由器将其资源分配决策外包给其他实体。但是，该模型不适用于没有信令协议的DiffServ[DSARCH]。因此，必须向路由器提供影响资源分配决策的策略。显然，需要协调基于RSVP和基于DiffServ的策略，以提供end2end QoS。工作组开始扩展和利用诸如COPS for RSVP等方法来支持区分服务策略。这就产生了COPS-PR[COPS-PR]。
These extensions caused concern that the IETF was about to develop a set of fragmented solutions which were locally optimized for specific technologies and not well integrated in the existing Internet Management Framework. The concern prompted some of the Area Directors associated with the Operations and Management, Transport and General areas, and some IAB members to organize a two day meeting in mid September 1999. The primary purpose of the meeting was to examine the requirements for configuration management and evaluate the COPS/PIB and SNMP/MIB approaches in light of these requirements.
这些扩展引起了人们的担忧，即IETF即将开发一套针对特定技术进行局部优化的零散解决方案，而这些解决方案并未很好地集成到现有的互联网管理框架中。这一担忧促使一些与运营和管理、运输和一般区域相关的区域主管，以及一些IAB成员在1999年9月中旬组织了一次为期两天的会议。会议的主要目的是检查配置管理的要求，并根据这些要求评估COPS/PIB和SNMP/MIB方法。
At the end of the two day meeting there was no consensus on several issues and as a result a number of 'design teams' were created. This document is the output of the design team chartered with the identification of a global set of configuration management requirements. This document has benefited from feedback received during the Configuration Management BOF that took place on November 11, 1999 during the 46th IETF in Washington DC, USA. The document has also benefited from comments sent to the confmgt@ops.ietf.org mailing list.
在为期两天的会议结束时，在几个问题上没有达成共识，因此成立了一些“设计团队”。本文件是特许设计团队的输出，确定了一套全球配置管理要求。本文件得益于1999年11月11日在美国华盛顿特区举行的第46届IETF期间配置管理BOF期间收到的反馈。本文件还得益于发送给confmgt@ops.ietf.org邮件列表。
Keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT" and "MAY" that appear in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [Bra97].
本文件中出现的关键词“必须”、“不得”、“必需”、“应该”、“不应该”和“可能”应按照RFC 2119[Bra97]中所述进行解释。
The target audience for this document includes system designers, implementers of network configuration and management technology and others interested in gaining a general background understanding of the issues related to configuration management in general, and in the Internet in particular along with associated requirements. This document assumes that the reader is familiar with the Internet Protocol, related networking technology, and general network management terms and concepts.
本文件的目标受众包括系统设计师、网络配置和管理技术的实施者以及其他有兴趣了解与配置管理相关问题的一般背景知识的人，尤其是在互联网上，以及相关需求。本文档假设读者熟悉互联网协议、相关网络技术以及一般网络管理术语和概念。
Device-Local Configuration
设备本地配置
Configuration data that is specific to a particular network device. This is the finest level of granularity for configuring network devices.
特定于特定网络设备的配置数据。这是配置网络设备的最佳粒度级别。
Network-Wide Configuration
网络范围配置
Configuration data that is not specific to any particular network device and from which multiple device-local configurations can be derived. Network-wide configuration provides a level of abstraction above device-local configurations.
非特定于任何特定网络设备的配置数据，可从中派生多个设备本地配置。网络范围的配置提供了高于设备本地配置的抽象级别。
Configuration Data Translator
配置数据转换器
A function that transforms Configuration Management Data (high-level policies) or Network-wide configuration data (middle-level policies) into device local configurations (low-level policies) based on the
将配置管理数据（高级策略）或网络范围的配置数据（中级策略）转换为设备本地配置（低级策略）的功能
generic capabilities of network devices. This function can be performed either by devices themselves or by some intermediate entity.
网络设备的通用功能。此功能可以由设备本身或某些中间实体执行。
Configuring large networks is becoming an increasingly difficult task. The problem intensifies as networks increase their size, not only in terms of number of devices, but also with a greater variety of devices, with each device having increasing functionality and complexity. That is, networks are getting more complex in multiple dimensions simultaneously (number of devices, time scales for configuration, etc.) making the task of configuring these more complex.
配置大型网络正变得越来越困难。随着网络规模的增加，问题加剧，不仅在设备数量方面，而且在设备种类更多的情况下，每个设备的功能和复杂性都在增加。也就是说，网络在多个维度同时变得更加复杂（设备数量、配置时间尺度等），使得配置这些设备的任务更加复杂。
In the past, configuring a network device has been a three step process. The network operator, engineer or entity responsible for the network created a model of the network and its expected behavior. Next, this (model + expected behavior) was formalized and recorded in the form of high-level policies. Finally, these policies were then translated into device-local configurations and provisioned into each network device for enforcement.
在过去，配置网络设备需要三个步骤。负责网络的网络运营商、工程师或实体创建了网络及其预期行为的模型。接下来，这个（模型+预期行为）被形式化，并以高级策略的形式记录下来。最后，将这些策略转换为设备本地配置，并提供给每个网络设备以供实施。
Any high-level policy changes (changes in the network topology and/or its expected behavior) needed to be translated and provisioned to all network devices affected by the change. Figure 1 depicts this model and shows how high-level policies for a network could be translated into four device-local configurations. In this model, network operators or engineers functioned as configuration data translators; they translated the high-level policies to device-local configuration data.
任何高级策略更改（网络拓扑和/或其预期行为的更改）都需要转换并提供给受更改影响的所有网络设备。图1描述了此模型，并显示了如何将网络的高级策略转换为四种设备本地配置。在该模型中，网络运营商或工程师充当配置数据转换器；他们将高级策略转换为设备本地配置数据。
A configuration data translator could take the topology independent behavior description such as high-level policies (first input source) combine it with topology information (second input source) as well as status/performance/monitoring information (third input source) to derive device-local configurations. Note that there could be several configuration data translators operating in tandem on a set of devices. However, there could be only one configuration data translator operating at a particular device at any given instance.
配置数据转换器可以采用与拓扑无关的行为描述，例如高级策略（第一输入源），将其与拓扑信息（第二输入源）以及状态/性能/监控信息（第三输入源）相结合，以导出设备本地配置。请注意，可能有多个配置数据转换器在一组设备上串联运行。然而，在任何给定实例中，在特定设备上可能只有一个配置数据转换器在运行。
Configuration Management
Data (High-level Policies)
|
|
|
|
Network V Network
Topology -----> Configuration <---- Status/performance
Information Data Translator(s) Information
|
|
|
|
-------------------------------------------------
| | | |
Device Device Device Device
Local Local Local Local
Conf(1) Conf(2) Conf(3) Conf(4)
Configuration Management
Data (High-level Policies)
|
|
|
|
Network V Network
Topology -----> Configuration <---- Status/performance
Information Data Translator(s) Information
|
|
|
|
-------------------------------------------------
| | | |
Device Device Device Device
Local Local Local Local
Conf(1) Conf(2) Conf(3) Conf(4)
Figure 1. Current model for configuring network devices.
图1。用于配置网络设备的当前模型。
Historically, network operators and engineers used protocols and mechanisms such as SNMP and CLI applications to provision or configure network devices. In their current versions, these mechanisms have proven to be difficult to use because of their low-level of granularity and their device-specific nature. This problem is worse when provisioning multiple network devices requiring large amounts of configuration data.
过去，网络运营商和工程师使用协议和机制（如SNMP和CLI应用程序）来提供或配置网络设备。在其当前版本中，这些机制已被证明难以使用，因为它们的粒度级别较低，并且具有特定于设备的特性。当配置需要大量配置数据的多个网络设备时，此问题更为严重。
It is evident that network administrators and existing configuration management software can not keep up with the growth in complexity of networks and that an efficient, integrated configuration management solution is needed. Several IETF Working Groups working on this problem converged into adding a layer of abstraction to the traditional configuration management process described in figure 1. Figure 2 depicts this process after the layer of abstraction is added. As in the previous figure, first the network operator, engineer or entity responsible for the network creates a model of the network and its expected behavior. This is formalized and recorded in the form of high-level policies.
很明显，网络管理员和现有的配置管理软件无法跟上网络复杂性的增长，因此需要一个高效、集成的配置管理解决方案。几个致力于这个问题的IETF工作组汇聚一堂，为图1中描述的传统配置管理过程添加了一层抽象。图2描述了添加抽象层后的这个过程。如上图所示，首先负责网络的网络运营商、工程师或实体创建网络及其预期行为的模型。这是以高级别政策的形式正式确定和记录的。
These policies are combined with topology information as well as status/performance information to generate network-wide configuration data. These middle level-policies are simpler to manage and represent behaviors shared by multiple network devices.
这些策略与拓扑信息以及状态/性能信息相结合，以生成网络范围的配置数据。这些中间层策略更易于管理和表示多个网络设备共享的行为。
Configuration Management
Data (High-level Policies)
|
|
|
|
Network V Network
Topology -----> Network-Wide <---- Status/performance
Information Configuration Information
Data
|
|
|
|
V
Configuration
Data Translator(s)
|
|
|
|
-------------------------------------------------
| | | |
Device Device Device Device
Local Local Local Local
Conf(1) Conf(2) Conf(3) Conf(4)
Configuration Management
Data (High-level Policies)
|
|
|
|
Network V Network
Topology -----> Network-Wide <---- Status/performance
Information Configuration Information
Data
|
|
|
|
V
Configuration
Data Translator(s)
|
|
|
|
-------------------------------------------------
| | | |
Device Device Device Device
Local Local Local Local
Conf(1) Conf(2) Conf(3) Conf(4)
Figure 2. Proposed model for configuring network devices.
图2。用于配置网络设备的建议模型。
Device local configurations are generated by automated configuration data translators and are supplied to each network device for enforcement. Note how this model only describes the function of the configuration data translators and it does not dictate its functional location. This is to say that translators may reside outside of the devices (as it was the case in figure 1 since they were humans) or may be possibly collocated with each device.
设备本地配置由自动配置数据转换器生成，并提供给每个网络设备以供实施。请注意，该模型仅描述了配置数据转换器的功能，而没有规定其功能位置。也就是说，翻译人员可能位于设备之外（如图1所示，因为他们是人类），或者可能与每个设备并置。
As in the previous model, any high-level policy changes (changes in the network topology and/or its expected behavior) needs to be propagated to all network devices affected by the change. However, in the configuration model depicted in figure 2 network operators and engineers can specify the behavior of the network in a simplified manner reducing the amount of device specific knowledge needed.
与前面的模型一样，任何高级策略更改（网络拓扑和/或其预期行为的更改）都需要传播到受更改影响的所有网络设备。然而，在图2所示的配置模型中，网络运营商和工程师可以以简化的方式指定网络的行为，从而减少所需的特定于设备的知识量。
One should keep in mind that in some cases per instance device local configuration is needed in network devices. An integrated solution MUST allow room for this. Also, the introduction of automated configuration data translators assumes that all information needed to
应该记住，在某些情况下，网络设备中需要每个实例的设备本地配置。集成解决方案必须为此留出空间。此外，自动配置数据转换器的引入假设所有需要的信息
make an error free conversion of network-wide configuration data into device-local configuration data is available. In the event that such data is not available the solution MUST detect this and act accordingly.
在可用的情况下，将网络范围的配置数据无错误地转换为设备本地配置数据。如果此类数据不可用，解决方案必须检测到这一点并相应采取行动。
All IETF WGs active in this area agrees upon the following requirements for configuration management. An integrated configuration management solution MUST:
在该领域活跃的所有IETF工作组同意以下配置管理要求。集成配置管理解决方案必须：
1) provide means by which the behavior of the network can be specified at a level of abstraction (network-wide configuration) higher than a set of configuration information specific to individual devices,
1) 提供在抽象级别（网络范围配置）上指定网络行为的方法，该抽象级别高于特定于单个设备的一组配置信息，
2) be capable of translating network-wide configurations into device-local configuration. The identification of the relevant subset of the network-wide policies to be down-loaded is according to the capabilities of each device,
2) 能够将网络范围的配置转换为设备本地配置。要下载的网络范围策略的相关子集的标识取决于每个设备的能力，
3) be able to interpret device-local configuration, status and monitoring information within the context of network-wide configurations,
3) 能够在网络范围配置的上下文中解释设备本地配置、状态和监控信息，
4) be capable of provisioning (e.g., adding, modifying, deleting, dumping, restoring) complete or partial configuration data to network devices simultaneously or in a synchronized fashion as necessary,
4) 能够同时或以必要的同步方式向网络设备提供（例如，添加、修改、删除、转储、恢复）完整或部分配置数据，
4a) be able to provision multiple device-local configurations to support fast switch-overs without the need to down-load potentially large configuration changes to many devices,
4a）能够提供多个设备本地配置，以支持快速切换，而无需将可能较大的配置更改下载到许多设备，
5) provide means by which network devices can send feedback information (configuration data confirmation, network status and monitoring information, specific events, etc.) to the management system,
5) 提供网络设备向管理系统发送反馈信息（配置数据确认、网络状态和监控信息、特定事件等）的方式，
6) be capable of provisioning complete or partial configuration data to network devices dynamically as a result of network specific or network-wide events,
6) 能够根据网络特定或网络范围的事件动态地向网络设备提供完整或部分配置数据，
7) provide efficient and reliable means compared to current versions of today's mechanisms (CLI, SNMP) to provision large amounts of configuration data,
7) 与当前版本的机制（CLI、SNMP）相比，提供高效可靠的方法来提供大量配置数据，
8) provide secure means to provision configuration data. The system must provide support for access control, authentication, integrity-checking, replay- protection and/or privacy security services. The minimum level of granularity for access control and authentication is host based. The system SHOULD support user/role based access control and authentication for users in different roles with different access privileges,
8) 提供提供配置数据的安全方法。系统必须提供访问控制、身份验证、完整性检查、重播保护和/或隐私安全服务的支持。访问控制和身份验证的最低粒度级别是基于主机的。系统应支持对不同角色、不同访问权限的用户进行基于用户/角色的访问控制和身份验证，
9) provide expiration time and effective time capabilities to configuration data. It is required that some configuration data items be set to expire, and other items be set to never expire,
9) 为配置数据提供过期时间和有效时间功能。需要将某些配置数据项设置为过期，而将其他项设置为永不过期，
10) provide error detection (including data-specific errors) and failure recovery mechanisms (including prevention of inappropriately partial configurations when needed) for the provisioning of configuration data,
10） 为配置数据的提供提供错误检测（包括特定于数据的错误）和故障恢复机制（包括在需要时防止不适当的部分配置），
11) eliminate the potential for mis-configuration occurring through concurrent shared write access to the device's configuration data,
11） 通过对设备配置数据的并发共享写访问消除错误配置的可能性，
12) provide facilities (with host and user-based authentication granularity) to help in tracing back configuration changes,
12） 提供设施（基于主机和用户的身份验证粒度）以帮助跟踪配置更改，
13) allow for the use of redundant components, both network elements and configuration application platforms, and for the configuration of redundant network elements.
13） 允许使用冗余组件，包括网元和配置应用程序平台，以及配置冗余网元。
14) be flexible and extensible to accommodate future needs. Configuration management data models are not fixed for all time and are subject to evolution like any other management data model. It is therefore necessary to anticipate that changes will be needed, but it is not possible to anticipate what those changes might be. Such changes could be to the configuration data model, supporting message types, data types, etc., and to provide mechanisms that can deal with these changes effectively without causing inter-operability problems or having to replace/update large amounts of fielded networking devices,
14） 灵活且可扩展，以适应未来的需要。配置管理数据模型并非总是固定不变的，与任何其他管理数据模型一样，它也会不断变化。因此，有必要预测将需要的变化，但不可能预测这些变化可能是什么。此类变更可以是对配置数据模型、支持消息类型、数据类型等的变更，并提供能够有效处理这些变更的机制，而不会导致互操作性问题或必须更换/更新大量现场网络设备，
15) leverage knowledge of the existing SNMP management infrastructure. The system MUST leverage knowledge of and experience with MIBs and SMI.
15） 利用现有SNMP管理基础架构的知识。系统必须利用MIB和SMI的知识和经验。
Security Considerations
安全考虑
This document reflects the current requirements that the IETF believes configuration management systems MUST have to properly support IP-based networks. The authors believe that a configuration management system MUST provide mechanisms by which one can ascertain the integrity and authenticity of the configuration data at all times. In some cases the privacy of the data is important therefore configuration management system MUST provide facilities to support this services as required not only while the data is stored but also during provisioning or reception. Requirements eight and twelve capture the required security services.
本文件反映了IETF认为配置管理系统必须具备的当前要求，以正确支持基于IP的网络。作者认为，配置管理系统必须提供各种机制，通过这些机制，人们可以随时确定配置数据的完整性和真实性。在某些情况下，数据的隐私是重要的，因此配置管理系统必须提供设施，以便在存储数据时以及在供应或接收期间，根据需要支持此服务。需求八和需求十二捕获所需的安全服务。
Acknowledgments
致谢
The authors thank Juergen Schoenwaelder for his contributions to this document. The authors also thank Walter Weiss and Andrew Smith for providing feedback to early versions of this document. Finally, the authors thank the IESG for motivating and supporting this work.
作者感谢Juergen Schoenwaeld对本文件的贡献。作者还感谢Walter Weiss和Andrew Smith为本文档的早期版本提供反馈。最后，作者感谢IESG对这项工作的激励和支持。
References
工具书类
[Bra97] Bradner, S., "Key Words for use in RFCs to indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[Bra97]Bradner，S.，“RFC中用于表示需求水平的关键词”，BCP 14，RFC 2119，1997年3月。
[COPS] Boyle, J., Cohen, R., Durham, D., Herzog, S., Rajan, R. and A. Sastry, "The COPS (Common Open Policy Service) Protocol", RFC 2748, August 1999.
[COPS]Boyle，J.，Cohen，R.，Durham，D.，Herzog，S.，Rajan，R.和A.Sastry，“COPS（公共开放政策服务）协议”，RFC 27481999年8月。
[RSVP] Braden, R., Editor, et al., "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) Version 1 - Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997.
[RSVP]Braden，R.，编辑，等，“资源预留协议（RSVP）第1版-功能规范”，RFC 2205，1997年9月。
[COPS-RSVP] Boyle, J., Cohen, R., Durham, D., Herzog, S., Rajan, R. and A. Sastry, "COPS usage for RSVP", RFC 2749, June 1999.
[COPS-RSVP]Boyle，J.，Cohen，R.，Durham，D.，Herzog，S.，Rajan，R.和A.Sastry，“RSVP的COPS用法”，RFC 27491999年6月。
[COPS-PROV] Chan, K., Seligson, J., Durham, D., Gai, S., McCloghrie, K., Herzog, S., Reichmeyer, F., Yavatkar, R. and A. Smith, "COPS Usage for Policy Provisioning (COPS-PR)", RFC 3084, March 2001.
[COPS-PROV]Chan，K.，Seligson，J.，Durham，D.，Gai，S.，McCloghrie，K.，Herzog，S.，Reichmeyer，F.，Yavatkar，R.和A.Smith，“政策制定的COPS使用（COPS-PR）”，RFC 30842001年3月。
Authors' Addresses
作者地址
Keith McCloghrie Cisco Systems, Inc. 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134-1706 USA
Keith McCloghrie Cisco Systems，Inc.美国加利福尼亚州圣何塞西塔斯曼大道170号，邮编95134-1706
Phone: +1 (408) 526-5260
EMail: kzm@cisco.com
Phone: +1 (408) 526-5260
EMail: kzm@cisco.com
Luis A. Sanchez Megisto Systems 20251 Century Boulevard Germantown, MD 02138 USA
美国马里兰州日尔曼镇世纪大道20251号路易斯A.桑切斯-梅吉斯托系统公司，邮编：02138
Phone: +1 (301) 444-1747
EMail: lsanchez@megisto.com
Phone: +1 (301) 444-1747
EMail: lsanchez@megisto.com
Jon Saperia JDS Consulting, Inc. 174 Chapman Street Watertown, MA 02472 USA
Jon Saperia JDS咨询公司，美国马萨诸塞州沃特敦查普曼街174号，邮编02472
Phone: +1 (617) 744-1079
EMail: saperia@jdscons.com
Phone: +1 (617) 744-1079
EMail: saperia@jdscons.com
Full Copyright Statement
完整版权声明
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved.
版权所有（C）互联网协会（2001年）。版权所有。
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English.
本文件及其译本可复制并提供给他人，对其进行评论或解释或协助其实施的衍生作品可全部或部分编制、复制、出版和分发，不受任何限制，前提是上述版权声明和本段包含在所有此类副本和衍生作品中。但是，不得以任何方式修改本文件本身，例如删除版权通知或对互联网协会或其他互联网组织的引用，除非出于制定互联网标准的需要，在这种情况下，必须遵循互联网标准过程中定义的版权程序，或根据需要将其翻译成英语以外的其他语言。
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
上述授予的有限许可是永久性的，互联网协会或其继承人或受让人不会撤销。
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
本文件和其中包含的信息是按“原样”提供的，互联网协会和互联网工程任务组否认所有明示或暗示的保证，包括但不限于任何保证，即使用本文中的信息不会侵犯任何权利，或对适销性或特定用途适用性的任何默示保证。
Acknowledgement
确认
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.
RFC编辑功能的资金目前由互联网协会提供。