Network Working Group T. Dreibholz
Request for Comments: 5356 University of Duisburg-Essen
Category: Experimental M. Tuexen
Muenster Univ. of Applied Sciences
September 2008
Network Working Group T. Dreibholz
Request for Comments: 5356 University of Duisburg-Essen
Category: Experimental M. Tuexen
Muenster Univ. of Applied Sciences
September 2008
Reliable Server Pooling Policies
可靠的服务器池策略
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。
Abstract
摘要
This document describes server pool policies for Reliable Server Pooling (RSerPool) including considerations for implementing them at Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol (ENRP) servers and pool users.
本文档描述了用于可靠服务器池（RSerPool）的服务器池策略，包括在端点Handlespace冗余协议（ENRP）服务器和池用户上实施这些策略的注意事项。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. Conventions .....................................................3
3. Terminology and Definitions .....................................3
3.1. Load .......................................................3
3.2. Weight .....................................................3
4. Non-Adaptive Policies ...........................................4
4.1. Round Robin Policy .........................................4
4.1.1. Description .........................................4
4.1.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................4
4.1.3. Pool User Considerations ............................4
4.1.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............4
4.2. Weighted Round Robin Policy ................................5
4.2.1. Description .........................................5
4.2.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................5
4.2.3. Pool User Considerations ............................5
4.2.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............5
4.3. Random Policy ..............................................5
4.3.1. Description .........................................5
4.3.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................6
4.3.3. Pool User Considerations ............................6
4.3.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............6
4.4. Weighted Random Policy .....................................6
4.4.1. Description .........................................6
1. Introduction ....................................................3
2. Conventions .....................................................3
3. Terminology and Definitions .....................................3
3.1. Load .......................................................3
3.2. Weight .....................................................3
4. Non-Adaptive Policies ...........................................4
4.1. Round Robin Policy .........................................4
4.1.1. Description .........................................4
4.1.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................4
4.1.3. Pool User Considerations ............................4
4.1.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............4
4.2. Weighted Round Robin Policy ................................5
4.2.1. Description .........................................5
4.2.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................5
4.2.3. Pool User Considerations ............................5
4.2.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............5
4.3. Random Policy ..............................................5
4.3.1. Description .........................................5
4.3.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................6
4.3.3. Pool User Considerations ............................6
4.3.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............6
4.4. Weighted Random Policy .....................................6
4.4.1. Description .........................................6
4.4.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................6
4.4.3. Pool User Considerations ............................6
4.4.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............7
4.5. Priority Policy ............................................7
4.5.1. Description .........................................7
4.5.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................7
4.5.3. Pool Element Considerations .........................7
4.5.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............7
5. Adaptive Policies ...............................................8
5.1. Least Used Policy ..........................................8
5.1.1. Description .........................................8
5.1.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................8
5.1.3. Pool User Considerations ............................8
5.1.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............8
5.2. Least Used with Degradation Policy .........................9
5.2.1. Description .........................................9
5.2.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................9
5.2.3. Pool User Considerations ............................9
5.2.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............9
5.3. Priority Least Used Policy ................................10
5.3.1. Description ........................................10
5.3.2. ENRP Server Considerations .........................10
5.3.3. Pool User Considerations ...........................10
5.3.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter .............10
5.4. Randomized Least Used Policy ..............................11
5.4.1. Description ........................................11
5.4.2. ENRP Server Considerations .........................11
5.4.3. Pool User Considerations ...........................11
5.4.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter .............11
6. Security Considerations ........................................11
7. IANA Considerations ............................................12
7.1. A New Table for RSerPool Policy Types .....................12
8. Reference Implementation .......................................13
9. References .....................................................13
9.1. Normative References ......................................13
9.2. Informative References ....................................14
4.4.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................6
4.4.3. Pool User Considerations ............................6
4.4.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............7
4.5. Priority Policy ............................................7
4.5.1. Description .........................................7
4.5.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................7
4.5.3. Pool Element Considerations .........................7
4.5.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............7
5. Adaptive Policies ...............................................8
5.1. Least Used Policy ..........................................8
5.1.1. Description .........................................8
5.1.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................8
5.1.3. Pool User Considerations ............................8
5.1.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............8
5.2. Least Used with Degradation Policy .........................9
5.2.1. Description .........................................9
5.2.2. ENRP Server Considerations ..........................9
5.2.3. Pool User Considerations ............................9
5.2.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter ..............9
5.3. Priority Least Used Policy ................................10
5.3.1. Description ........................................10
5.3.2. ENRP Server Considerations .........................10
5.3.3. Pool User Considerations ...........................10
5.3.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter .............10
5.4. Randomized Least Used Policy ..............................11
5.4.1. Description ........................................11
5.4.2. ENRP Server Considerations .........................11
5.4.3. Pool User Considerations ...........................11
5.4.4. Pool Member Selection Policy Parameter .............11
6. Security Considerations ........................................11
7. IANA Considerations ............................................12
7.1. A New Table for RSerPool Policy Types .....................12
8. Reference Implementation .......................................13
9. References .....................................................13
9.1. Normative References ......................................13
9.2. Informative References ....................................14
The protocols defined in [RFC5353], [RFC5352], and [RFC5354] support a variety of server policies. Some of the policies use dynamic load information of the pool elements and others do not. Therefore, we classify them as adaptive and non-adaptive. The selection of the pool element is performed by two different entities, the ENRP server and the pool user. Some of the consequences for policies that are not stateless are described in [ICN2005] and [LCN2005].
[RFC5353]、[RFC5352]和[RFC5354]中定义的协议支持多种服务器策略。一些策略使用池元素的动态负载信息，而其他策略则不使用。因此，我们将它们分为自适应和非自适应。池元素的选择由两个不同的实体执行，即ENRP服务器和池用户。[ICN2005]和[LCN2005]中描述了非无状态策略的一些后果。
Therefore, this document describes not only packet formats but also gives a detailed description of the procedures to be followed at the ENRP servers and the pool users to implement each server policy.
因此，本文档不仅描述了数据包格式，还详细描述了ENRP服务器和池用户实施每个服务器策略所需遵循的程序。
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
本文件中的关键词“必须”、“不得”、“必需”、“应”、“不应”、“应”、“不应”、“建议”、“可”和“可选”应按照[RFC2119]中所述进行解释。
The term load is a value specifying how much a pool element's resources are currently utilized. 0x00000000 states that the pool element is not utilized (0%); 0xffffffff states that it is fully utilized (100%). Defining what utilization means is application-dependent and out of the scope of RSerPool. However, it is required that all pool elements of the same pool using load information have the same definition of load.
术语load是一个值，用于指定池元素的资源当前使用量。0x00000000表示未使用池元素（0%）；0xFFFFFF表示它已被充分利用（100%）。定义利用率的含义取决于应用程序，不在RSerPool的范围之内。但是，要求使用负载信息的同一池的所有池元素具有相同的负载定义。
For example, load may define the current amount of users out of a maximum on an FTP server, the CPU usage of a database server, or the memory utilization of a compute service.
例如，load可以定义FTP服务器上超出最大值的当前用户数、数据库服务器的CPU使用率或计算服务的内存使用率。
Weight defines a pool element's service capacity relative to other pool elements of the same pool. Theoretically, there is no upper limit for weight values (although limited by datatype size). Defining what value weights compare is application-dependent and out of the scope of RSerPool. However, it is required that all pool elements of the same pool using weight information have the same definition of weight.
权重定义池元素相对于同一池的其他池元素的服务容量。理论上，权重值没有上限（尽管受数据类型大小限制）。定义权重比较的值取决于应用程序，不在RSerPool的范围内。但是，要求使用权重信息的同一池的所有池元素具有相同的权重定义。
A weight of 0 denotes that the pool element is not capable of providing any service; a higher weight denotes that the pool element is capable of providing better service than a pool element having a lower weight.
权重为0表示池元素不能提供任何服务；较高的权重表示池元素能够提供比具有较低权重的池元素更好的服务。
For example, weight may define a compute service's computation capacity. That is, a pool element of weight 100 will complete a work package in half the time compared to a pool element of weight 50.
例如，权重可以定义计算服务的计算能力。也就是说，与重量为50的池元素相比，重量为100的池元素将在一半的时间内完成工作包。
The Round Robin (RR) policy is a very simple and efficient policy that requires state. This policy is denoted as the default policy and MUST be supported by all RSerPool components.
The Round Robin (RR) policy is a very simple and efficient policy that requires state. This policy is denoted as the default policy and MUST be supported by all RSerPool components.translate error, please retry
The ENRP server SHOULD hold the pool elements of each server pool in a circular list and SHOULD store a pointer to one of the elements, called the head. On reception of a handle resolution request, the ENRP server SHOULD return the pool elements from the circular list, starting with head. Then the head SHOULD be advanced by one element.
ENRP服务器应将每个服务器池的池元素保存在循环列表中，并应存储指向其中一个元素的指针（称为head）。在收到句柄解析请求时，ENRP服务器应该从循环列表中返回池元素，从head开始。然后头部应向前移动一个元件。
Using this algorithm ensures that not all lists presented to the pool users start with the same element.
使用此算法可确保呈现给池用户的所有列表并非都以相同的元素开头。
A pool user SHOULD use the list of pool elements returned by the ENRP server in a round robin fashion, starting with the first. If all elements of the list have been used, it should start from the beginning again until the information is out of date.
池用户应该以循环方式使用ENRP服务器返回的池元素列表，从第一个开始。如果列表中的所有元素都已使用，则应从头开始，直到信息过期。
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0x8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x00000001 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0x8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x00000001 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The Weighted Round Robin (WRR) policy is a generalization of the RR policy. If all weights are 1, then WRR is just RR.
加权循环（WRR）策略是RR策略的推广。如果所有权重均为1，则WRR仅为RR。
The ENRP server SHOULD follow the same rules as RR but initialize and modify the circular list differently. The ENRP server puts each pool element, possibly, multiple times into the list such that:
ENRP服务器应遵循与RR相同的规则，但初始化和修改循环列表的方式不同。ENRP服务器可能多次将每个池元素放入列表中，以便：
o The ratio of the number of occurrences of a pool element to the list length is the same as the ratio of the weight of that pool element to the sum of weights.
o 池元素的出现次数与列表长度的比率与该池元素的权重与权重之和的比率相同。
o The multiple entries of each pool element should be as evenly distributed as possible in the circular list.
o 每个池元素的多个条目应尽可能均匀地分布在循环列表中。
The pool user SHOULD follow the same rules as RR.
池用户应遵循与RR相同的规则。
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0xc |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x00000002 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Weight |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0xc |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x00000002 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Weight |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o Weight (32 bits, unsigned integer): Weight constant for the WRR process.
o 权重（32位，无符号整数）：WRR进程的权重常量。
The Random (RAND) policy is a very simple stateless policy.
随机（RAND）策略是一种非常简单的无状态策略。
The ENRP server selects, at most, the requested number of pool elements from the list of pool elements. Each element MUST NOT be reported more than once to the pool user.
ENRP服务器最多从池元素列表中选择请求数量的池元素。每个元素不得向池用户报告一次以上。
Each time the pool user must select one pool element, it does this by randomly selecting one element from the list of pool elements received from the ENRP server.
每次池用户必须选择一个池元素时，它都会从从ENRP服务器接收的池元素列表中随机选择一个元素。
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0x8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x00000003 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0x8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x00000003 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The Weighted Random (WRAND) policy is a generalization of the RAND policy, adding a weight for each pool element entry. RAND is equal to WRAND having all weights set to 1.
加权随机（WRAND）策略是RAND策略的推广，为每个池元素条目添加权重。RAND等于所有权重都设置为1的WRAND。
The ENRP server SHOULD select, at most, the requested number of pool elements randomly from the list of pool elements. Each element MUST NOT be reported more than once to the pool user. The probability of selecting a pool element should be the ratio of the weight of that pool element to the sum of weights.
ENRP服务器最多应从池元素列表中随机选择请求的池元素数。每个元素不得向池用户报告一次以上。选择池元素的概率应为该池元素的权重与权重之和的比率。
Each time the pool user must select one pool element, it does this by randomly selecting one element from the list of pool elements received from the ENRP server.
每次池用户必须选择一个池元素时，它都会从从ENRP服务器接收的池元素列表中随机选择一个元素。
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0xc |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x00000004 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Weight |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0xc |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x00000004 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Weight |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o Weight (32 bits, unsigned integer): Weight constant for the WRAND process.
o 权重（32位，无符号整数）：WRAND进程的权重常量。
The Priority (PRIO) policy can be used to select always a pool element with the highest priority.
优先级（PRIO）策略可用于始终选择具有最高优先级的池元素。
The ENRP server MUST select the pool elements with the highest priorities. They MUST be reported in decreasing order. If multiple pool elements have the same priority, they may be listed in any order.
ENRP服务器必须选择具有最高优先级的池元素。它们必须按降序报告。如果多个池元素具有相同的优先级，则可以按任意顺序列出它们。
The pool user MUST select the active pool element with the highest priority.
池用户必须选择具有最高优先级的活动池元素。
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0xc |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x00000005 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Priority |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0xc |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x00000005 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Priority |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o Priority (32 bits, unsigned integer): Larger numbers mean higher priorities.
o 优先级（32位，无符号整数）：数字越大表示优先级越高。
The Least Used (LU) policy uses load information provided by the pool elements to select the lowest-loaded pool elements within the pool.
最少使用（LU）策略使用池元素提供的负载信息来选择池中负载最低的池元素。
The ENRP server SHOULD select, at most, the requested number of pool elements. Their load values SHOULD be the lowest possible ones within the pool. Each element MUST NOT be reported more than once to the pool user. If there is a choice of equal-loaded pool elements, round robin selection SHOULD be made among these elements. The returned list of pool elements MUST be sorted in ascending order by load value.
ENRP服务器最多应选择请求的池元素数。它们的负载值应该是池中可能的最低值。每个元素不得向池用户报告一次以上。如果有相等加载池元素的选择，则应在这些元素之间进行循环选择。返回的池元素列表必须按加载值按升序排序。
The pool user should try to use the pool elements returned from the list in the order returned by the ENRP server. A subsequent call for handle resolution may result in the same list. Therefore, it is RECOMMENDED for a pool user to request multiple entries in order to have a sufficient amount of feasible backup entries available.
池用户应尝试按照ENRP服务器返回的顺序使用从列表返回的池元素。随后对句柄解析的调用可能会产生相同的列表。因此，建议池用户请求多个条目，以便有足够数量的可行备份条目可用。
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0xc |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x40000001 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0xc |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x40000001 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o Load (32 bits, unsigned integer): Current load of the pool element.
o Load（32位，无符号整数）：池元素的当前加载。
The Least Used with Degradation (LUD) policy extends the LU policy by a load degradation value describing the pool element's load increment when a new service association is accepted.
最小使用降级（LUD）策略通过负载降级值扩展LU策略，该值描述接受新服务关联时池元素的负载增量。
For every pool element entry, a degradation counter MUST be stored. When a pool element entry is added or updated by registration or re-registration, this counter MUST be set to 0. When an entry is selected for being returned to a pool user, the internal degradation counter MUST be incremented by 1. The selection of pool element entries is handled like for LU, except that the selected pool element entries SHOULD have the lowest possible sum of load value + degradation counter * load degradation value.
对于每个池元素条目，必须存储降级计数器。通过注册或重新注册添加或更新池元素条目时，此计数器必须设置为0。选择要返回给池用户的条目时，内部降级计数器必须递增1。池元素项的选择处理方式与LU类似，只是所选池元素项应具有负载值+降级计数器*负载降级值的最低可能总和。
See LU policy.
参见LU政策。
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0x10 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x40000002 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load Degradation |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0x10 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x40000002 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load Degradation |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o Load (32 bits, unsigned integer): Current load of the pool element.
o Load（32位，无符号整数）：池元素的当前加载。
o Load Degradation (32 bits, unsigned integer): Load Degradation constant of the pool element.
o 负载降级（32位，无符号整数）：池元素的负载降级常量。
The Priority Least Used (PLU) policy uses load information provided by the pool elements to select the lowest-loaded pool elements within the pool under the assumption that a new application request is accepted by the pool elements. Therefore, the pool elements also have to specify load degradation information.
优先级最少使用（PLU）策略使用池元素提供的负载信息来选择池中负载最低的池元素，前提是池元素接受新的应用程序请求。因此，池元素还必须指定负载降级信息。
Example: Pool elements A and B are loaded by 50%, but the load of A will increase due to a new application request only by 10% while B will be fully loaded. PLU allows the specification of this load degradation in the policy information; the selection is made on the lowest sum of load and degradation value. That is, A will be selected (50+10=60) instead of B (50+50=100).
示例：池元素A和B的负载增加了50%，但由于新的应用程序请求，A的负载只会增加10%，而B将完全加载。PLU允许在策略信息中指定此负载降级；选择的荷载和劣化值之和最小。也就是说，将选择A（50+10=60）而不是B（50+50=100）。
The ENRP server SHOULD select, at most, the requested number of pool elements. Their sums of load + degradation SHOULD be the lowest possible ones within the pool. Each element MUST NOT be reported more than once to the pool user. If there is a choice of equal-valued pool element entries, round robin SHOULD be made among these elements. The returned list of pool elements MUST be sorted ascending by the sum of load and degradation value.
ENRP服务器最多应选择请求的池元素数。它们的负载+降级总和应该是池中可能的最低值。每个元素不得向池用户报告一次以上。如果可以选择等值池元素条目，则应在这些元素之间进行循环。返回的池元素列表必须按负载和降级值之和升序排序。
The pool user should try to use the pool elements returned from the list in the order returned by the ENRP server. A subsequent call for handle resolution may result in the same list. Therefore, it is RECOMMENDED for a pool user to request multiple entries in order to have a sufficient amount of feasible backup entries available.
池用户应尝试按照ENRP服务器返回的顺序使用从列表返回的池元素。随后对句柄解析的调用可能会产生相同的列表。因此，建议池用户请求多个条目，以便有足够数量的可行备份条目可用。
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0x10 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x40000003 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load Degradation |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0x10 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x40000003 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load Degradation |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o Load (32 bits, unsigned integer): Current load of the pool element.
o Load（32位，无符号整数）：池元素的当前加载。
o Load Degradation (32 bits, unsigned integer): Load Degradation constant of the pool element.
o 负载降级（32位，无符号整数）：池元素的负载降级常量。
The Randomized Least Used (RLU) policy combines LU and WRAND. That is, the pool element entries are selected randomly. The probability for a pool element entry A, utilized with load_A, to be selected is (0xFFFFFFFF - load_A) / (sum(0xFFFFFFFF-load_x)), i.e., this PE's unload part related to the whole pool unload rate.
随机最少使用（RLU）策略结合了LU和WRAND。也就是说，池元素条目是随机选择的。与load_a一起使用的池元素条目a被选择的概率为（0xFFFFFF-load_a）/（总和（0xFFFFFF-load_x）），即该PE的卸载部分与整个池卸载速率相关。
The ENRP server SHOULD behave like WRAND, having every PE's weight set to (0xffffffff -- load value provided by the pool element).
ENRP服务器的行为应该类似于WRAND，将每个PE的权重设置为（0xFFFFFF—pool元素提供的load值）。
See WRAND policy.
请参阅土地政策。
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0xc |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x40000004 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Param Type = 0x8 | Length = 0xc |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Policy Type = 0x40000004 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Load |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o Load (32 bits, unsigned integer): Current load of the pool element.
o Load（32位，无符号整数）：池元素的当前加载。
The security threats regarding RSerPool have been analyzed in RSerPool threats [RFC5355]. The server policy descriptions in this document do not add any other threats.
RSerPool威胁[RFC5355]中分析了与RSerPool相关的安全威胁。本文档中的服务器策略描述不添加任何其他威胁。
This document (RFC 5356) is the reference for all registrations described in this section. All registrations have been listed on the RSerPool Parameters page.
本文件（RFC 5356）是本节所述所有注册的参考文件。所有注册都已列在RSerPool参数页面上。
RSerPool policy types that are 4-byte values are maintained by IANA. The format of the policy type value is defined as follows:
4字节值的RSerPool策略类型由IANA维护。策略类型值的格式定义如下：
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|X|A| Policy Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|X|A| Policy Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o X: If set to 1, the policy is user defined and not standardized. All standards policies reserved by the IETF use X=0.
o X：如果设置为1，则策略是用户定义的，而不是标准化的。IETF保留的所有标准策略都使用X=0。
o A: If set to 1, the policy is adaptive. Otherwise, it is non-adaptive.
o 答：如果设置为1，则策略是自适应的。否则，它是非自适应的。
o Policy Number: The actual number of the policy.
o 策略编号：策略的实际编号。
Nine initial policy types have been assigned and are maintained in a new table, "RSerPool Policy Types":
已分配九种初始策略类型，并在新表“RSerPool策略类型”中进行维护：
Value Policy Reference
----- --------- ---------
0x00000000 (reserved, invalid value) RFC 5356
0x00000001 Round Robin RFC 5356
0x00000002 Weighted Round Robin RFC 5356
0x00000003 Random RFC 5356
0x00000004 Weighted Random RFC 5356
0x00000005 Priority RFC 5356
0x00000006 (reserved by IETF) RFC 5356
...
0x3fffffff (reserved by IETF) RFC 5356
Value Policy Reference
----- --------- ---------
0x00000000 (reserved, invalid value) RFC 5356
0x00000001 Round Robin RFC 5356
0x00000002 Weighted Round Robin RFC 5356
0x00000003 Random RFC 5356
0x00000004 Weighted Random RFC 5356
0x00000005 Priority RFC 5356
0x00000006 (reserved by IETF) RFC 5356
...
0x3fffffff (reserved by IETF) RFC 5356
0x40000000 (reserved, invalid value) RFC 5356 0x40000001 Least Used RFC 5356 0x40000002 Least Used with Degradation RFC 5356 0x40000003 Priority Least Used RFC 5356 0x40000004 Randomized Least Used RFC 5356 0x40000005 (reserved by IETF) RFC 5356 ... 0x7fffffff (reserved by IETF) RFC 5356
0x40000000（保留，无效值）RFC 5356 0x40000001最少使用RFC 5356 0x40000002最少使用降级RFC 5356 0x40000003优先级最少使用RFC 5356 0x40000004随机化最少使用RFC 5356 0x40000005（由IETF保留）RFC 5356。。。0x7fffffff（由IETF保留）RFC 5356
0x80000000 (private use, non-standard policy) RFC 5356 ... 0xffffffff (private use, non-standard policy) RFC 5356
0x8000000（私人使用，非标准政策）RFC 5356。。。0xFFFFFF（私人使用，非标准策略）RFC 5356
Requests to register an RSerPool policy type in this table should be sent to IANA. The number must be unique and use the appropriate upper bits. The "Specification Required" policy of [RFC5226] MUST be applied.
在此表中注册RSerPool策略类型的请求应发送给IANA。数字必须是唯一的，并使用适当的高位。必须采用[RFC5226]的“要求规范”政策。
The policy type space from 0x80000000 to 0xffffffff is designated for private use.
0x8000000到0xFFFFFF之间的策略类型空间指定为专用。
A reference implementation of RSerPool and the policies described in this document is available at [RSerPoolPage] and described in [Dre2006].
本文档中描述的RSerPool和策略的参考实现可在[RSerPoolPage]上获得，并在[Dre2006]中进行了描述。
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2119]Bradner，S.，“RFC中用于表示需求水平的关键词”，BCP 14，RFC 2119，1997年3月。
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008.
[RFC5226]Narten，T.和H.Alvestrand，“在RFCs中编写IANA注意事项部分的指南”，BCP 26，RFC 5226，2008年5月。
[RFC5354] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Stillman, M., and M. Tuexen, "Aggregate Server Access Protocol (ASAP) and Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol (ENRP) Parameters", RFC 5354, September 2008.
[RFC5354]Stewart，R.，Xie，Q.，Stillman，M.，和M.Tuexen，“聚合服务器访问协议（ASAP）和端点Handlespace冗余协议（ENRP）参数”，RFC 53542008年9月。
[RFC5352] Stewart, R., Xie, Q., Stillman, M., and M. Tuexen, "Aggregate Server Access Protocol (ASAP)", RFC 5352, September 2008.
[RFC5352]Stewart，R.，Xie，Q.，Stillman，M.，和M.Tuexen，“聚合服务器访问协议（ASAP）”，RFC 53522008年9月。
[RFC5353] Xie, Q., Stewart, R., Stillman, M., Tuexen, M., and A. Silverton, "Endpoint Handlespace Redundancy Protocol (ENRP)", RFC 5353, September 2008.
[RFC5353]Xie，Q.，Stewart，R.，Stillman，M.，Tuexen，M.，和A.Silverton，“端点Handlespace冗余协议（ENRP）”，RFC 53532008年9月。
[RFC5355] Stillman, M., Ed., Gopal, R., Guttman, E., Holdrege, M., and S. Sengodan, "Threats Introduced by Reliable Server Pooling (RSerPool) and Requirements for Security in Response to Threats", RFC 5355, September 2008.
[RFC5355]Stillman，M.，Ed.，Gopal，R.，Guttman，E.，Holdrege，M.，和S.Sengodan，“可靠服务器池（RSerPool）带来的威胁和应对威胁的安全要求”，RFC 53552008年9月。
[RSerPoolPage] Dreibholz, T., "Thomas Dreibholz's RSerPool Page", <http://tdrwww.iem.uni-due.de/dreibholz/rserpool/>.
[RSepoolpage]Dreibholz，T.，“Thomas Dreibholz的RSepool页面”<http://tdrwww.iem.uni-due.de/dreibholz/rserpool/>.
[Dre2006] Dreibholz, T., "Reliable Server Pooling -- Evaluation, Optimization and Extension of a Novel IETF Architecture", Ph.D. Thesis University of Duisburg-Essen, Faculty of Economics, Institute for Computer Science and Business Information Systems, March 2007, <http://duepublico.uni-duisburg-essen.de/ servlets/DerivateServlet/Derivate-16326/ Dre2006-final.pdf>.
[Dre2006]Dreibholz，T.，“可靠的服务器池——新型IETF体系结构的评估、优化和扩展”，博士。杜伊斯堡-埃森大学经济学院计算机科学与商业信息系统研究所，2007年3月，<http://duepublico.uni-duisburg-essen.de/ servlets/developerateservlet/developerate-16326/Dre2006 final.pdf>。
[LCN2005] Dreibholz, T. and E. Rathgeb, "On the Performance of Reliable Server Pooling Systems", Proceedings of the 30th IEEE Local Computer Networks Conference, November 2005.
[LCN2005]Dreibholz，T.和E.Rathgeb，“关于可靠服务器池系统的性能”，第30届IEEE本地计算机网络会议记录，2005年11月。
[ICN2005] Dreibholz, T., Rathgeb, E., and M. Tuexen, "Load Distribution Performance of the Reliable Server Pooling Framework", Proceedings of the 4th IEEE International Conference on Networking, April 2005.
[ICN2005]Dreibholz，T.，Rathgeb，E.和M.Tuexen，“可靠服务器池框架的负载分布性能”，第四届IEEE网络国际会议记录，2005年4月。
Authors' Addresses
作者地址
Thomas Dreibholz University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute for Experimental Mathematics Ellernstrasse 29 45326 Essen, Nordrhein-Westfalen Germany
托马斯，德雷布霍兹，杜伊斯堡-埃森大学实验数学研究所EELNSTRASE 29，45326，埃森
Phone: +49-201-1837637
Fax: +49-201-1837673
EMail: dreibh@iem.uni-due.de
URI: http://www.iem.uni-due.de/~dreibh/
Phone: +49-201-1837637
Fax: +49-201-1837673
EMail: dreibh@iem.uni-due.de
URI: http://www.iem.uni-due.de/~dreibh/
Michael Tuexen Muenster University of Applied Sciences Stegerwaldstrasse 39 48565 Steinfurt Germany
米迦勒TuxEN明斯特应用科学大学StugWaldStasSE 39 48565斯坦福特德国
Phone: +49-2551-962550
Fax: +49-2551-962563
EMail: tuexen@fh-muenster.de
Phone: +49-2551-962550
Fax: +49-2551-962563
EMail: tuexen@fh-muenster.de
Full Copyright Statement
完整版权声明
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
版权所有（C）IETF信托基金（2008年）。
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
本文件受BCP 78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.