|
|
5.3.3.3 Precedence Handling For All Routers
Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
5.3.3.3 Precedence Handling For All Routers
Up:
Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
Up:
Requests For Comments
Up:
RFC 1812
Up:
5. INTERNET LAYER - FORWARDING
Up:
5.3 SPECIFIC ISSUES
Up:
5.3.3 IP Precedence
Prev: 5.3.3.2 Lower Layer Precedence Mappings
Next: 5.3.4 Forwarding of Link Layer Broadcasts
5.3.3.3 Precedence Handling For All Routers
5.3.3.3 Precedence Handling For All Routers
A router (whether or not it employs precedence-ordered queue
service):
- MUST accept and process incoming traffic of all precedence levels
normally, unless it has been administratively configured to do
otherwise.
- MAY implement a validation filter to administratively restrict
the use of precedence levels by particular traffic sources. If
provided, this filter MUST NOT filter out or cut off the
following sorts of ICMP error messages: Destination Unreachable,
Redirect, Time Exceeded, and Parameter Problem. If this filter
is provided, the procedures required for packet filtering by
addresses are required for this filter also.
- DISCUSSION
-
Precedence filtering should be applicable to specific
source/destination IP Address pairs, specific protocols, specific
ports, and so on.
An ICMP Destination Unreachable message with code 14 SHOULD be sent
when a packet is dropped by the validation filter, unless this has
been suppressed by configuration choice.
- MAY implement a cutoff function that allows the router to be set
to refuse or drop traffic with precedence below a specified
level. This function may be activated by management actions or
by some implementation dependent heuristics, but there MUST be a
configuration option to disable any heuristic mechanism that
operates without human intervention. An ICMP Destination
Unreachable message with code 15 SHOULD be sent when a packet is
dropped by the cutoff function, unless this has been suppressed
by configuration choice.
A router MUST NOT refuse to forward datagrams with IP precedence
of 6 (Internetwork Control) or 7 (Network Control) solely due to
precedence cutoff. However, other criteria may be used in
conjunction with precedence cutoff to filter high precedence
traffic.
- DISCUSSION
-
Unrestricted precedence cutoff could result in an unintentional
cutoff of routing and control traffic. In the general case, host
traffic should be restricted to a value of 5 (CRITIC/ECP) or
below; this is not a requirement and may not be correct in certain
systems.
- MUST NOT change precedence settings on packets it did not
originate.
- SHOULD be able to configure distinct precedence values to be used
for each routing or management protocol supported (except for
those protocols, such as OSPF, which specify which precedence
value must be used).
- MAY be able to configure routing or management traffic precedence
values independently for each peer address.
- MUST respond appropriately to Link Layer precedence-related error
indications where provided. An ICMP Destination Unreachable
message with code 15 SHOULD be sent when a packet is dropped
because a link cannot accept it due to a precedence-related
condition, unless this has been suppressed by configuration
choice.
- DISCUSSION
-
The precedence cutoff mechanism described in (3) is somewhat
controversial. Depending on the topological location of the area
affected by the cutoff, transit traffic may be directed by routing
protocols into the area of the cutoff, where it will be dropped.
This is only a problem if another path that is unaffected by the
cutoff exists between the communicating points. Proposed ways of
avoiding this problem include providing some minimum bandwidth to
all precedence levels even under overload conditions, or
propagating cutoff information in routing protocols. In the
absence of a widely accepted (and implemented) solution to this
problem, great caution is recommended in activating cutoff
mechanisms in transit networks.
A transport layer relay could legitimately provide the function
prohibited by (4) above. Changing precedence levels may cause
subtle interactions with TCP and perhaps other protocols; a
correct design is a non-trivial task.
The intent of (5) and (6) (and the discussion of IP Precedence in
ICMP messages in Section [4.3.2]) is that the IP precedence bits
should be appropriately set, whether or not this router acts upon
those bits in any other way. We expect that in the future
specifications for routing protocols and network management
protocols will specify how the IP Precedence should be set for
messages sent by those protocols.
The appropriate response for (7) depends on the link layer
protocol in use. Typically, the router should stop trying to send
offensive traffic to that destination for some period of time, and
should return an ICMP Destination Unreachable message with code 15
(service not available for precedence requested) to the traffic
source. It also should not try to reestablish a preempted Link
Layer connection for some time.
Next: 5.3.4 Forwarding of Link Layer Broadcasts
Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
5.3.3.3 Precedence Handling For All Routers
|
|
|
 |

|
 |
|
Protect yourself from cyberstalkers, identity thieves, and those who would snoop on you.
| |
Stop spam from invading your inbox without losing the mail you want. We give you more control over your e-mail than any other service.
| |
Block popups, ads, and malicious scripts while you surf the net through our anonymous proxies.
| |
Participate in Usenet, host your web files, easily send anonymous messages, and more, much more.
| |
All private, all encrypted, all secure, all in an easy to use service, and all for only $5.95 a month!
|
|
Service Details
|
|
 |
|