Network Working Group K. Nagami
Request for Comments: 4908 INTEC NetCore
Category: Experimental S. Uda
JAIST
N. Ogashiwa
NOWARE, Inc.
H. Esaki
University of Tokyo
R. Wakikawa
Keio University
H. Ohnishi
NTT
June 2007
Network Working Group K. Nagami
Request for Comments: 4908 INTEC NetCore
Category: Experimental S. Uda
JAIST
N. Ogashiwa
NOWARE, Inc.
H. Esaki
University of Tokyo
R. Wakikawa
Keio University
H. Ohnishi
NTT
June 2007
Multihoming for Small-Scale Fixed Networks Using Mobile IP and Network Mobility (NEMO)
使用移动IP和网络移动性（NEMO）的小型固定网络多宿
Status of This Memo
关于下段备忘
This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
这份备忘录为互联网社区定义了一个实验性协议。它没有规定任何类型的互联网标准。要求进行讨论并提出改进建议。本备忘录的分发不受限制。
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
版权所有（C）IETF信托基金（2007年）。
IETF Note
IETF注释
This RFC is not a candidate for any level of Internet Standard. The IETF disclaims any knowledge of the fitness of this RFC for any purpose and in particular notes that the decision to publish is not based on IETF review for such things as security, congestion control, or inappropriate interaction with deployed protocols. The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at its discretion. Readers of this document should exercise caution in evaluating its value for implementation and deployment. See RFC 3932 for more information.
本RFC不适用于任何级别的互联网标准。IETF不承认本RFC适用于任何目的的任何知识，特别注意到，发布决定并非基于IETF对安全、拥塞控制或与已部署协议的不当交互等事项的审查。RFC编辑已自行决定发布本文件。本文档的读者在评估其实施和部署价值时应谨慎。有关更多信息，请参阅RFC 3932。
Abstract
摘要
Multihoming technology improves the availability of host and network connectivity. Since the behaviors of fixed and mobile networks differ, distinct architectures for each have been discussed and proposed. This document proposes a common architecture for both mobile and fixed networking environments, using mobile IP (RFC 3775) and Network Mobility (NEMO; RFC 3963). The proposed architecture requires a modification of mobile IP and NEMO so that multiple Care-of Addresses (CoAs) can be used. In addition, multiple Home Agents (HAs) that are located in different places are required for redundancy.
多宿技术提高了主机和网络连接的可用性。由于固定网络和移动网络的行为不同，因此讨论并提出了各自不同的体系结构。本文档使用移动IP（RFC 3775）和网络移动性（NEMO；RFC 3963）为移动和固定网络环境提出了一种通用架构。建议的架构需要修改移动IP和NEMO，以便可以使用多个转交地址（COA）。此外，需要位于不同位置的多个归属代理（HA）来实现冗余。
Users of small-scale networks need an easy method to improve network availability and to load balance several links. Multihoming technology is one of the solutions to improve availability. Conventional major multihoming networks use BGP, but it has some issues. Therefore, we propose a multihoming architecture using mobile IP [1] and NEMO [2] for small-scale fixed networks.
小型网络的用户需要一种简单的方法来提高网络可用性并平衡多个链路的负载。多主机技术是提高可用性的解决方案之一。传统的主要多宿网络使用BGP，但存在一些问题。因此，我们针对小型固定网络提出了一种使用移动IP[1]和NEMO[2]的多宿体系结构。
In a multihoming network environment, both users and network managers benefit from controlling outgoing traffic, incoming traffic, or both of them. Those benefits are described in "Goals and Benefits of Multihoming" [3]. The following is a summary of those goals and benefits:
在多主网络环境中，用户和网络管理员都可以从控制传出流量、传入流量或两者中获益。“多主定位的目标和好处”[3]中描述了这些好处。以下是这些目标和好处的摘要：
o Ubiquitous Access
o 无处不在的访问
o Redundancy/Fault-Recovery
o 冗余/故障恢复
o Load Sharing
o 负荷分担
o Load Balancing
o 负载平衡
o Bi-casting
o 双向浇铸
o Preference Settings
o 首选项设置
Several multihoming technologies have been proposed so far. Conventional major multihoming networks use BGP, but it has some issues, as follows.
到目前为止，已经提出了几种多宿技术。传统的主要多宿网络使用BGP，但它有一些问题，如下所示。
(1) Increasing route entries in the Internet
(1) 增加Internet中的路由条目
In the multihoming environments, each user's network needs to advertise its address block to all ISPs connected to them. If a multihomed user connects to only one ISP, the ISP can advertise routing information to aggregate them. But some multihomed users need to connect with different ISPs to be prepared for ISP failure. In this case, ISPs need to advertise routing information for multihomed users without aggregation. Therefore, the number of routing entries in the Internet is increasing one by one.
在多主环境中，每个用户的网络都需要向与其连接的所有ISP公布其地址块。如果多宿用户只连接到一个ISP，ISP可以公布路由信息以聚合它们。但是，一些多址用户需要连接不同的ISP，以便为ISP故障做好准备。在这种情况下，ISP需要在没有聚合的情况下为多址用户发布路由信息。因此，互联网上的路由条目数量正在一个接一个地增加。
(2) Difficulty of using multiple links efficiently
(2) 有效使用多个链接的困难
It is not easy to control incoming traffic in the case of the conventional multihoming architecture using BGP. Therefore, load balancing of connected links is difficult.
在使用BGP的传统多宿体系结构的情况下，控制传入流量并不容易。因此，连接链路的负载平衡是困难的。
Basically, mobile IP (MIP) and NEMO have been proposed for mobile hosts or mobile networks; however, their architecture and protocol can be used for fixed networks and to solve the problems mentioned above. The details of the solution are described in the sections below.
基本上，移动IP（MIP）和NEMO已被提议用于移动主机或移动网络；然而，它们的体系结构和协议可以用于固定网络并解决上述问题。解决方案的详细信息将在以下各节中介绍。
Moreover, by using the architecture and the protocol of MIP and the NEMO, the cost of network operation will be decreased. For instance, in the architecture of MIP and NEMO, renumbering IP addresses when office or network equipment is relocated becomes unnecessary, as the network address prefix used by a user network in a mobile IP environment does not depend on the upstream ISP's network prefix.
此外，通过使用MIP和NEMO的体系结构和协议，可以降低网络运营成本。例如，在MIP和NEMO的体系结构中，当办公室或网络设备重新定位时，重新编号IP地址变得不必要，因为移动IP环境中用户网络使用的网络地址前缀不依赖于上游ISP的网络前缀。
By their nature, NEMO and mobile IP must work with multihoming. This is because mobile nodes need to use multiple links to improve the availability of network connectivity since the wireless link is not always stable. Therefore, we propose that multihoming for fixed nodes (routers and hosts) uses the framework of NEMO and mobile IP.
就其性质而言，NEMO和移动IP必须与多主系统协同工作。这是因为移动节点需要使用多个链路来提高网络连接的可用性，因为无线链路并不总是稳定的。因此，我们建议固定节点（路由器和主机）的多宿使用NEMO和移动IP的框架。
Figure 1 shows the basic multihoming network architecture. In this architecture, a mobile router (MR), which is a border router of the multihomed network, sets up several tunnels between the MR and the HA by multiple-CoA registration. An HA (or a router to which the HA
图1显示了基本的多主网络体系结构。在该架构中，移动路由器（MR）是多宿网络的边界路由器，通过多个CoA注册在MR和HA之间建立多个隧道。HA（或HA连接到的路由器）
belongs) advertises the user's network prefix (Prefix X in Figure 1) to ISPs via the routing protocol. If the HA has several multihomed networks (Prefix X and Y in Figure 1), they can advertise an aggregated network prefix to ISPs. Therefore, the Internet routing entries do not increase one by one when the number of multihomed users is increased.
归属）通过路由协议向ISP播发用户的网络前缀（图1中的前缀X）。如果HA有多个多址网络（图1中的前缀X和Y），它们可以向ISP公布聚合的网络前缀。因此，当多宿用户数量增加时，Internet路由条目不会逐个增加。
HA1
||(Advertise aggregated prefix X and Y)
|v
ISP
|
+------------------------+---------------------+
| The Internet |
+-+----------+--------------------+----------+-+
| | | |
ISP-A ISP-B ISP-A' ISP-B'
| | | |
| | | |
+--- MR ---+ +--- MR ---+
CoA1 | CoA2 CoA1|CoA2
| |
-------+--------- (Prefix X) -------+------ (Prefix Y)
Multihomed Network X Multihomed Network Y
HA1
||(Advertise aggregated prefix X and Y)
|v
ISP
|
+------------------------+---------------------+
| The Internet |
+-+----------+--------------------+----------+-+
| | | |
ISP-A ISP-B ISP-A' ISP-B'
| | | |
| | | |
+--- MR ---+ +--- MR ---+
CoA1 | CoA2 CoA1|CoA2
| |
-------+--------- (Prefix X) -------+------ (Prefix Y)
Multihomed Network X Multihomed Network Y
Figure 1: Advertisement of aggregated prefixes
图1：聚合前缀的广告
Packets to multihomed users go to the HA, and the HA sends packets to the MR using CoA1 and CoA2. The HA selects a route in which a CoA is used. The route selection algorithm is out for scope of this document. This can improve the availability of the user network and control traffic going from the ISP to the MR. In the basic architecture, HA1 is the single point of failure. In order to improve the availability of the user network, multiple HAs are needed. This is described in Section 3.2.
发送给多宿用户的数据包发送到HA，HA使用CoA1和CoA2向MR发送数据包。HA选择使用CoA的路由。路由选择算法不在本文档范围内。这可以提高用户网络的可用性，并控制从ISP到MR的流量。在基本架构中，HA1是单点故障。为了提高用户网络的可用性，需要多个HA。第3.2节对此进行了说明。
HA1
^ | |
(1) Packets to prefix X | | | (2) HA forwards the packets
are sent to HA | | v to CoA1 or CoA2
+-------+------+
| The Internet |
+-+----------+-+
| |
| | |(3) Packets are forwarded over
| | | the MIP tunnel selected by
| | v the HA1
ISP-A ISP-B
| | |
| | |
+--- MR ---+ v
CoA1 | CoA2
|
-------+--------- (Prefix X)
Multihomed Network A
HA1
^ | |
(1) Packets to prefix X | | | (2) HA forwards the packets
are sent to HA | | v to CoA1 or CoA2
+-------+------+
| The Internet |
+-+----------+-+
| |
| | |(3) Packets are forwarded over
| | | the MIP tunnel selected by
| | v the HA1
ISP-A ISP-B
| | |
| | |
+--- MR ---+ v
CoA1 | CoA2
|
-------+--------- (Prefix X)
Multihomed Network A
Figure 2: Packet Forwarding by HA
图2：HA的数据包转发
Multiple Care-of-Addresses are needed to improve the availability and to control incoming and outgoing traffic. The current Mobile IPv6 and the NEMO Basic Support protocol does not allow registration of more than one Care-of Address bound to a home address to the home agent. Therefore, [4] proposes to extend MIP6 and NEMO Basic Support to allow multiple Care-of Address registrations for the particular home address.
需要多个转交地址来提高可用性并控制传入和传出流量。当前的移动IPv6和NEMO基本支持协议不允许将绑定到家庭地址的多个转交地址注册到家庭代理。因此，[4]建议扩展MIP6和NEMO基本支持，以允许针对特定家庭地址进行多个转交地址注册。
Multiple Home Agents should be geographically distributed across the Internet to improve service availability and for the load balancing of the HA. When all the networks that have HA advertise the same network prefix to their adjacent router/network, the traffic is automatically routed to the nearest Home Agent from the viewpoint of routing protocol topology. This operation has already been proven to work in the area of Web server applications, such as CDN (Contents Delivery Network), with the Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) and Exterior Gateway Protocol (EGP).
多个Home Agent应跨Internet地理分布，以提高服务可用性和HA的负载平衡。当所有具有HA的网络向其相邻的路由器/网络播发相同的网络前缀时，从路由协议拓扑的角度来看，流量将自动路由到最近的归属代理。此操作已被证明在Web服务器应用程序领域有效，例如CDN（内容交付网络），具有内部网关协议（IGP）和外部网关协议（EGP）。
In order to operate multiple HAs, all HAs must have the same information such as binding information. This synchronizes the databases among the HAs. The HAHA protocol [5] introduces the binding synchronization among HAs. This is the same architecture as Internal BGP (IBGP). The database is synchronized by full-mesh topology. In addition, in order to simplify operation of the HA, the database is synchronized using star topology. This is analogous to the IBGP route reflector.
为了操作多个HA，所有HA必须具有相同的信息，例如绑定信息。这将在HAs之间同步数据库。HAHA协议[5]引入了HA之间的绑定同步。这与内部BGP（IBGP）的体系结构相同。数据库通过全网格拓扑进行同步。此外，为了简化HA的操作，使用星形拓扑对数据库进行同步。这类似于IBGP路由反射器。
sync
HA1 ------ HA2
| |
+-+----------+-+
| The Internet |
+-+----------+-+
| |
ISP-A ISP-B
| |
| |
+--- MR ---+
CoA1 | CoA2
|
-------+---------
Multihomed Network
sync
HA1 ------ HA2
| |
+-+----------+-+
| The Internet |
+-+----------+-+
| |
ISP-A ISP-B
| |
| |
+--- MR ---+
CoA1 | CoA2
|
-------+---------
Multihomed Network
Figure 3: Architecture with HA Redundancy
图3：具有HA冗余的体系结构
The multihomed architecture proposed in this document is basically the same as the architecture of NEMO. Furthermore, NEMO protocols meet the requirements of the proposed architecture in this document, which are:
本文件中提出的多址体系结构与NEMO的体系结构基本相同。此外，NEMO协议满足本文件中提议架构的要求，即：
o The protocol can be used by the MR to send information such as the CoA, Home Address (HoA), and Binding Unique Identifier (BID) [4] to the HA.
o MR可使用该协议向HA发送CoA、家庭地址（HoA）和绑定唯一标识符（BID）[4]等信息。
o The protocol can establish multiple tunnels between the MR and HA.
o 该协议可以在MR和HA之间建立多个隧道。
o The protocol supports multiple HAs and can synchronize Binding Caches among multiple HAs.
o 该协议支持多个HA，并且可以在多个HA之间同步绑定缓存。
The proposed multihomed architecture uses NEMO protocols as one of the applications of NEMO. Needless to say, using the NEMO protocol is one of the solutions to accomplish the proposed multihome
所提出的多宿体系结构使用NEMO协议作为NEMO的应用之一。不用说，使用NEMO协议是实现所提议的多家庭的解决方案之一
architecture. Another solution is to propose a new protocol just like NEMO. Nevertheless, such a protocol would have functions just like those of NEMO.
建筑学另一个解决方案是像NEMO一样提出一个新的协议。然而，这样一个协议将具有与NEMO相同的功能。
In the proposed architecture, the xSP (Multihomed Service Provider) is introduced. The xSP is a conceptual service provider; it doesn't have to be connected to the Internet physically for all practical purposes. xSP has one or more aggregatable mobile network prefixes. xSP contracts with some ISPs that are physically connected to the Internet. The purpose of this contract is to set up some HAs in those ISPs' networks. Those HAs announce the xSP's aggregated mobile network prefixes. This means that HAs work just like border gateway routers, and this situation is the same as peering between the ISP and xSP. In this case, the origin Autonomous System (AS) announced from the HAs is the xSP.
在提出的体系结构中，引入了xSP（多址服务提供商）。xSP是一个概念服务提供商；它不必为了所有实际目的而连接到互联网。xSP有一个或多个可聚合的移动网络前缀。xSP与一些物理连接到Internet的ISP签订合同。本合同的目的是在这些ISP的网络中建立一些HAs。他们已经宣布了xSP的聚合移动网络前缀。这意味着它的工作原理与边界网关路由器类似，这种情况与ISP和xSP之间的对等相同。在这种情况下，从HAs中宣布的源自治系统（AS）就是xSP。
On the other hand, a multihomed user (a small office user or home user) contracts with the xSP to acquire a mobile network prefix from the xSP. Each multihomed user has an MR and multiple L3 connectivity to the Internet via multiple ISPs, and the MR will establish multiple tunnels to the HA. Since the user's mobile network prefixes are aggregated and announced from the HA, the packets to the user's mobile network will be sent to the nearest HA depending on global routing information at that time. The HA that received such packets will forward them to the user's network over the established multiple tunnels.
另一方面，多址用户（小型办公室用户或家庭用户）与xSP签订合同，从xSP获取移动网络前缀。每个多址用户都有一个MR和通过多个ISP连接到Internet的多个L3连接，并且MR将建立到HA的多个隧道。由于用户的移动网络前缀被聚合并从HA宣布，因此发送到用户的移动网络的分组将被发送到最近的HA，这取决于当时的全局路由信息。接收到这些包的HA将通过已建立的多个隧道将它们转发到用户的网络。
This model of route announcement from multiple HAs is compatible with the conventional scalable Internet architecture, and it doesn't have scalability problems.
这种来自多个HA的路由公告模型与传统的可伸缩互联网架构兼容，并且不存在可伸缩性问题。
We have implemented and experimented with the proposed architecture. Currently, the system works well not only on our test-bed network, but on the Internet. In our experimentation, the MR has two upstream organizations (ISPs) and two Care-of Addresses for each organization. The MR uses the multiple-CoA option to register the Care-of Addresses to the HA.
我们已经实现并试验了所提出的体系结构。目前，该系统不仅在我们的试验台网络上运行良好，而且在互联网上运行良好。在我们的实验中，MR有两个上游组织（ISP）和每个组织的两个转交地址。MR使用多CoA选项向医管局注册转交地址。
This document describes requirements of multiple CoAs and HAs for redundancy. It is necessary to enhance the protocols of MIP and NEMO to solve the requirements. Security considerations of these multihoming networks must be considered in a specification of each protocol.
本文件描述了多个CoA的要求，并对冗余进行了说明。为了解决这一需求，有必要对MIP和NEMO协议进行改进。必须在每个协议的规范中考虑这些多宿网络的安全考虑。
7.1. Normative References
7.1. 规范性引用文件
[1] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004.
[1] Johnson，D.，Perkins，C.，和J.Arkko，“IPv6中的移动支持”，RFC 37752004年6月。
[2] Devarapalli, V., Wakikawa, R., Petrescu, A., and P. Thubert, "Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support Protocol", RFC 3963, January 2005.
[2] Devarapalli，V.，Wakikawa，R.，Petrescu，A.，和P.Thubert，“网络移动（NEMO）基本支持协议”，RFC 3963，2005年1月。
[3] Ernst, T., Montavont, N., Wakikawa, R., Paik, E., Ng, C., Kuladinithi, K., and T. Noel, "Goals and Benefits of Multihoming", Work in Progress, February 2004.
[3] Ernst，T.，Montavont，N.，Wakikawa，R.，Paik，E.，Ng，C.，Kuladiniti，K.，和T.Noel，“多宿的目标和好处”，正在进行的工作，2004年2月。
[4] Wakikawa, R., Ernst, T., and K. Nagami, "Multiple Care-of Addresses Registration", Work in Progress, March 2007.
[4] Wakikawa，R.，Ernst，T.，和K.Nagami，“多重照顾地址注册”，正在进行的工作，2007年3月。
[5] Wakikawa, R., Thubert, P., and V. Devarapalli, "Inter Home Agents Protocol (HAHA)", Work in Progress, February 2004.
[5] Wakikawa，R.，Thubert，P.，和V.Devarapalli，“居家代理协议（HAHA）”，正在进行的工作，2004年2月。
Authors' Addresses
作者地址
Kenichi Nagami INTEC NetCore Inc. 1-3-3, Shin-suna Koto-ku, Tokyo 135-0075 Japan
Kenichi Nagami INTEC NetCore Inc.1-3-3，日本东京新宿町135-0075
Phone: +81-3-5565-5069
Fax: +81-3-5565-5094
EMail: nagami@inetcore.com
Phone: +81-3-5565-5069
Fax: +81-3-5565-5094
EMail: nagami@inetcore.com
Satoshi Uda Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology 1-1 Asahidai Nomi, Ishikawa 923-1292 Japan
Satoshi Uda日本高级科学技术研究所1-1 Ashidai Nomi，石川923-1292日本
EMail: zin@jaist.ac.jp
EMail: zin@jaist.ac.jp
Nobuo Ogashiwa Network Oriented Software Institute, Inc. 190-2, Yoshii, Yoshii, Tano, Gunma 370-2132 Japan
小川信夫面向网络的软件研究所，公司地址：日本群马县谷野县吉井市吉井190-2 370-2132
EMail: ogashiwa@noware.co.jp
EMail: ogashiwa@noware.co.jp
Hiroshi Esaki The University of Tokyo 7-3-1 Hongo Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8656 Japan
东京大学：Hongo Bunkyo ku东京33-865日本
EMail: hiroshi@wide.ad.jp
EMail: hiroshi@wide.ad.jp
Ryuji Wakikawa Keio University Department of Environmental Information, Keio University. 5322 Endo Fujisawa, Kanagawa 252-8520 Japan
庆应大学环境信息系。5322日本神奈川藤泽内多252-8520
Phone: +81-466-49-1100
Fax: +81-466-49-1395
EMail: ryuji@sfc.wide.ad.jp
URI: http://www.wakikawa.org/
Phone: +81-466-49-1100
Fax: +81-466-49-1395
EMail: ryuji@sfc.wide.ad.jp
URI: http://www.wakikawa.org/
Hiroyuki Ohnishi NTT Corporation 9-11, Midori-Cho, 3-Chome Musashino-Shi, Tokyo 180-8585 Japan
Hiroyuki Ohnishi NTT Corporation 9-11，Midori Cho，3-Chome Musashino Shi，东京180-8585
EMail: ohnishi.hiroyuki@lab.ntt.co.jp
EMail: ohnishi.hiroyuki@lab.ntt.co.jp
Full Copyright Statement
完整版权声明
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
版权所有（C）IETF信托基金（2007年）。
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78 and at www.rfc-editor.org/copyright.html, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
本文件受BCP 78和www.rfc-editor.org/copyright.html中包含的权利、许可和限制的约束，除其中规定外，作者保留其所有权利。
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.
本文件及其包含的信息以“原样”为基础提供，贡献者、他/她所代表或赞助的组织（如有）、互联网协会、IETF信托基金和互联网工程任务组不承担任何明示或暗示的担保，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。
Intellectual Property
知识产权
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
IETF对可能声称与本文件所述技术的实施或使用有关的任何知识产权或其他权利的有效性或范围，或此类权利下的任何许可可能或可能不可用的程度，不采取任何立场；它也不表示它已作出任何独立努力来确定任何此类权利。有关RFC文件中权利的程序信息，请参见BCP 78和BCP 79。
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
向IETF秘书处披露的知识产权副本和任何许可证保证，或本规范实施者或用户试图获得使用此类专有权利的一般许可证或许可的结果，可从IETF在线知识产权存储库获取，网址为http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
IETF邀请任何相关方提请其注意任何版权、专利或专利申请，或其他可能涵盖实施本标准所需技术的专有权利。请将信息发送至IETF的IETF-ipr@ietf.org.
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。