[Search] [txt|ps|pdfized|bibtex] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01                                                         
Internet Draft                                               Shai Herzog
Expiration: Oct. 1997                                          IPHighway
File: draft-ietf-rsvp-policy-oops-01.txt
                                                    Dimitrios Pendarakis
                                                              Raju Rajan
                                                             Roch Guerin
                                         IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

            Open Outsourcing Policy Service (OOPS) for RSVP


Status of Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft.  Internet-Drafts are working
   documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas,
   and its working groups.  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the
   "1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in the Internet-Drafts Shadow
   Directories on ds.internic.net (US East Coast), nic.nordu.net
   (Europe), ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast), or munnari.oz.au (Pacific


   This document describes a protocol for exchanging policy information
   and decisions between an RSVP-capable router (client) and a policy
   server. The OOPS protocol supports a wide range of router
   configurations and RSVP implementations, and is compatible with the
   RSVP Extensions for Policy Control [Ext].

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                  [Page 1]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

1. Overview Reservation protocols function by discriminating between
   users by providing some users with better service at the expense of
   others.  The utility of reservation protocols is sharply degraded in
   the absence of mechanisms for restricting access to higher service
   categories and enforcing network and bandwidth usage criteria. In
   this document, we refer to such mechanisms as "policy control". This
   term is quite broad; it ranges from simple access control to
   sophisticated accounting and debiting mechanisms.

   The policy control component may reside fully within the router (as
   an add-on module to RSVP). However, it is often advantageous for
   routers to outsource some of their policy decision making to external
   entities.  Open Outsourcing Policy Service (OOPS) is a protocol for
   exchanging policy information and decisions between Local Policy
   Modules (LPMs) located within RSVP-capable routers and one or more
   external policy servers. OOPS is an open protocol in a sense that it
   does not define or depend on particular policies; instead, it
   provides a framework for adding, modifying and experimenting with new
   policies in a modular, plug-n-play fashion. Moreover, the OOPS
   protocol supports both partial and complete delegation of policy

   The OOPS protocol was designed to be compatible with the RSVP
   Extensions for Policy Control [Ext], both in the format of RSVP
   objects, as well as the set of supported services.

   The basic features of OOPS are as follows:

   Asymmetry between client and server

        Adding policy support to RSVP may require substantial
        modifications to platforms (e.g., routers) which may not have
        the required implementation flexibility and/or processing power.
        OOPS assumes that the server is more sophisticated than the
        client, in terms of processing power and support for diverse

   Support for a wide range of client implementation

        The OOPS protocol supports a wide range of client
        implementations.  At one end of the spectrum, a "dumb" client
        may delegate total responsibility to the server for all policy
        decisions without even maintaining cached states.  At the other
        end, smart clients can perform most policy processing locally
        and only address the server for a small number of sub-policy

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                  [Page 2]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

        elements and only when things change (otherwise, cache can be

   Support for different policy interfaces

        The OOPS protocol allows clients and servers to negotiate the
        nature and sophistication of their interaction. For instance,
        responses from the server to the client may be restricted to
        allow the server to merely accept, deny or remain neutral on
        reservation requests, while a more sophisticated implementation
        may allow the server to respond with preemption priorities or
        other characteristics of the reservation. The negotiation
        handshake is simple, and may always fall back onto the lowest
        level of interaction that must always be supported.

   Minimal knowledge of RSVP's processing rules.

        The server must be aware of the format of several RSVP objects
        and basic RSVP message types. However, it is not required to
        understand RSVP's processing rules (e.g., different reservation
        styles).  Moreover, OOPS functionality is not tied to that of
        RSVP, and OOPS may be extended to be used by other, non-RSVP,
        connection setup protocols.


        Both client and server may asynchronously generate queries or

   TCP for reliable communications

        TCP is used as a reliable communication protocol between client
        and server.

   1.1 Glossary


           Comprehensive set of rules for controlling some aspects of
           the network.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                  [Page 3]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997


           Modular building blocks out of which comprehensive policies
           are compiled.


           Data representation of policy information (e.g., POLICY_DATA
           objects in RSVP).

      Sub-policy element

           Data representation of sub-policy information, as
           encapsulated in POLICY_DESC objects.

   1.2 Representative OOPS Scenarios

      Figure 1 depicts some representative scenarios for policy control
      along an RSVP path, as envisioned in OOPS.  Nodes A, B and C
      belong to one administrative domain AD-1 (advised by policy server
      PS-1), while D and E belong to AD-2 and AD-3, respectively.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                  [Page 4]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

                             AD-1                AD-2       AD-3
               _______________/\___________     __/\__     __/\__
              {                            }   {      }   {      }

              +------+   +------+   +------+   +------+   +------+
      +----+  |  A   |   |  B   |   |  C   |   |  D   |   |  E   |  +----+
      | S1 |--| RSVP |---| RSVP |---| RSVP |---| RSVP |---| RSVP |--| R1 |
      +----+  +------+   +------+   +------+   +------+   +------+  +----+
              | LPM  |              | LPM  |   | LPM  |   | LPM  |
              +------+              +------+   +------+   +------+
                    \                /                       |
                     \              /                     +------+
                      \            /                      |Policy|
                       \          /                       |Server|
                        \        /                        | PS-2 |
                         \      /                         +------+
                         | PS-1 |

               Figure 1: Policy Control along an RSVP path

      Policy objects are carried in RSVP messages along the path
      consisting of four typical node types:

      (1) Policy incapable nodes: Node B. (2) Self-sufficient policy
      node: Node D does not need to outsource policy tasks to external
      servers since its LPM satisfies its entire policy needs.  (3)
      "Dumb" policy nodes: Node E is an unsophisticated node that lacks
      processing power, code support or caching capabilities, and needs
      to rely on PS-2 for every policy processing operation.  In this
      case, the volume of traffic and delay requirements make it
      imperative to connect Node E to PS-2 a direct link or a LAN.  (4)
      "Smart" policy nodes:  Nodes A and C include sophisticated LPMs,
      in that these nodes can process some sub-policy elements, and have
      the capacity to cache responses from PS-1.  In this case, the
      contact between the clients and server would be limited to
      occasional updates, and PS-1 could be located somewhere in AD-1.

      Consider the case where the receiver R1 sends a Resv message
      upstream toward sender S1.  Assuming that the reservation is
      successful, the conceptual flow of policy objects is:

      R1 -- E -- ELPM -- PS-2 -- ELPM -- E -- D -- DLPM -- D -- C -- CLPM
      -- PS-1 -- CLPM -- C -- B -- A -- ALPM -- PS-1 -- ALPM -- A -- S1.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                  [Page 5]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

      Of course, other OOPS messages may be exchanged between policy
      servers and nodes before authorizing the reservation at individual

      The functioning of the policy module at a policy aware router is
      presented through the following conceptual diagram.

                     +---------+         +----------+
                     |  RSVP   |         |  Policy  |
                     |  Module |         |  Server  |
                     +---------+  OOPS   |          |
                     |  LPM    |---------|          |
                     +- - - - -+         +----------+
                     |PSM| |PSM|         |PSM|  |PSM|
                     |___| |___|         |___|  |___|

           Figure 2: Local Policy Modules and Policy Server communications

      The policy server and the local policy module provide support for
      a number of sub-policy elements, each embodied by a policy sub-
      module (PSM).  The policy object forwarded by RSVP may contain a
      number of elements, each identified by a number, and hence
      destined to the sub-module that enforces that sub-policy element's
      number. For instance, some of these sub-objects may deal with
      authentication, others with security, accounting and so on.  The
      LPM is aware of the sub-modules it is capable of processing
      locally; After the handshake comes to know the set of sub-policies
      that are supported by the server. Processing of policy sub-objects
      can be split between the LPM and the policy server, and responses
      may be merged back before returning a unified response to RSVP.

2. OOPS Protocol: Basic Features

   OOPS is a transaction protocol, in which most communication is in the
   form of queries from the client followed by responses from the
   server.  However, a small portion of the communication may also
   consist of queries originating from the server, or of unidirectional
   notifications from one entity to another.  In this context, it is
   important that messages be distinguished by a unique association, so
   that responses may identify the query to which they correspond.

   This section discusses four fundamental concepts of the OOPS
   protocol:  (a) query/response mechanism, (b) flexible division of
   labor between client and server, and (c) consistent management of
   client, server and RSVP state.

   2.1 Query/Response mechanism

      Each OOPS message is uniquely identified by a sequence number;
      Both client and server begin communication with Mseq = 0 (the
      handshake message), and number consecutive messages in increasing
      order. These sequence numbers do not imply the order of execution;
      while the server receives messages in-order, it is free to execute
      them in any reasonable order.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 6]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

      These sequence numbers are mainly used by the Error-Notification
      operation as a means to identify the message that is associated
      with the reported error. [Note 2]

      2.1.1 Associating Queries and Responses

         Queries and responses carry a Q_ASSOC object which relates
         newly received responses to their original query operations.
         The contents of this object is client-specific and therefore
         opaque to the server; it is set by the client for each query
         and is echoed back as-is by the server. The client must store
         enough information in the Q_ASSOC object to enable its own
         unique identification of the original query.

   2.2 Division of Labor between Client and Server

      The OOPS protocol allows for a flexible division of
      responsibilities between server and client. First, the client must
      be able to decide how to distribute the processing and second, it
      must be able to merge the distributed responses into one unified

      2.2.1 Distributed Processing

         Processing of sub-policies (sub-policy elements within
         POLICY_DESC objects) can be performed by the server, the
         client, or by both.  The decision on which sub-policies are to
         be handled locally and which are to be sent to the server is
         always made by the client based on information exchanged during
         the connection establishment handshake (see Section 3.1).

         The client may remove sub-policy elements which are not to be
         processed by the server. In this case, the client is solely
         responsible for checking the integrity of the incoming policy
         object; [Note 3]
[Note 1] Execution order is implementation and policy specific; any
order that does not violate the policy specific requirements is assumed
to be reasonable.

[Note 2] Senders must be informed about the receiver's failure to
process their messages. This is especially critical given that OOPS
relies on TCP's reliability and lacks additional reliability mechanisms.

[Note 3] If any portion of the POLICY_DESC object is modified, the
digest integrity verification at the server is bound to fail.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 7]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

         the client must also set the OP-Code header flag to inform the
         server to that fact.

         During connection establishment, the server may request to have
         oversight over the clients local decisions; in this case, the
         client should forward incoming policy objects in their
         entirety, and consult the server for all RSVP flows, regardless
         of whether they include POLICY_DATA objects. This oversight is
         transparent to the client and is therefore post factum. [Note

         OOPS does not impose limitations on the number of servers
         connected to the client; when appropriate, the client could
         divide the work along policy lines between several servers, and
         be responsible for combining their results. In the rest of this
         document we describe the protocol for a single server-client

      2.2.2 Unification of Distributed Responses

         Division of labor between client and server is only possible to
         the extent that the client has the capability to unify or merge
         results; the client must be able to merge the results of
         queries arriving from servers with its own local results, to
         produce a single unified response to the underlying protocol
         (e.g., RSVP).

         Results unification is straight-forward for outgoing
         POLICY_DESC object; since sub-policy elements are independent,
         their unification is performed by concatenating all local and
         server elements and packing them in POLICY_DESC objects. [Note

         Unification is more complex for status queries, since the
         various responses must truly be merged to produce a single
         status result.  OOPS defines one basic (default) status
         response interface (object and unification rules).
[Note 4] The client should not wait for an oversight decision; if the
server overrides a local decision, it may notify the client sometime
later, even after the local client authorized the RSVP operation.

[Note 5] An oversight sub-policy element would override the locally
generated element, if the two are of the same type.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 8]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

         However, given that OOPS is an extensible framework, it allows
         the the client and server to negotiate a more sophisticated
         interface (see Section 3.1).  Additional response interfaces
         could be described in separate documents which should define
         the response object format and unification rules. [Note 6]

      2.2.3 Default Status Response

         The default status response object is of the C-Type 1.  C-Type
         1 objects may contain two values: a policy admission decision
         (PAD) and a preemption priority value (PP).  It is reasonable
         to assume that some clients would not be able to utilize the
         flow preemption priority information; such clients are free to
         ignore this value and assume that all flows are created equal.
         (have priority 0).

         PADs may have one of three values: ACCEPT, SNUB, and VETO.
         ACCEPT authorizes the query, SNUB signifies neutrality (neither
         accept nor reject).  A VETO from the server or LPM has a
         stronger semantics than a snub, since it has the power to
         forcefully reject a flow regardless of any accept decisions
         made by the other.

         The rules for unification of PAD values A and B are straight-

                   |  A+B                 | IF...               |
                   |  SNUB                | A=SNUB and B=SNUB   |
                   |  VETO                | A=VETO or  B=VETO   |
                   |  ACCEPT (+PP value)  | Otherwise           |

         A unified result of ACCEPT provides approval for the status
         query; both SNUB and VETO signal the rejection of the query.

         Note that a client and/or server should complete their policy
         processing even if a veto was cast by some policy. [Note 7]
[Note 6] A separate template document and a list of more sophisticated
responses should be prepared.

[Note 7] A wide range of sub-policies may not care about the final
status results and should be activated regardless.  For instance: a
policy that logs all policy queries.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 9]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

         An ACCEPT response is accompanied by a PP value between 0..255.
         Lower values describe higher priorities (priority 1 is the
         highest).  The value 0 is reserved for "N/A"; this value is
         used when preemption priority is not applicable.

         The unification of PP values A and B attempts to provide the
         highest priority (lowest value) which is supported by an ACCEPT
         decision. The value 0 has no effect on the unified priority:

                   |  A+B                 | IF...               |
                   |  MIN(A,B)            | A!=0 and B!=0       |
                   |  A                   | B=0                 |
                   |  B                   | A=0                 |
                   |  0 (n/a)             | A=0  and B=0        |

   2.3 State Management

      In order for policy objects contained in RSVP messages to be
      processed quickly and correctly, it is often required that the
      results of past policy decisions be cached and maintained at the
      LPM or the policy server. During normal operations, the state
      maintained in the client and in the server must remain consistent,
      and must timeout at roughly the identical times in RSVP, the
      client, and the server.

      The most straightforward method for state maintenance is for the
      LPM and the policy server to use the same soft-state mechanism as
      the RSVP capable router. Unfortunately, this soft-state approach
      has undesirable scaling properties since it requires the client to
      contact the server on each refresh period (regardless of state

      An alternative approach is to allow both client and server to use
      hard-state mechanisms that could limit the client-server
      communication to state updates only. To support the hard-state
      mode, the client must be able to distinguish between repeats
      (refreshes) and updates; it must also be able to translate the
      soft-state that is provided by RSVP into the hard-state exchanged
      with the server.

      Thus, we envision one end of the spectrum where a "dumb" client
      would use a soft-state approach and simply pass all policy objects
      to the server relying on it for all policy processing.  The rate
      of queries and lack of caching at the client implies the need for
      a dedicated, close-by server (PS-2, in our example). As we move

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 10]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

      towards the other extreme, clients become smarter, split the work
      between themselves and the server, utilize caching capabilities.
      Such clients could take advantage of the benefits of hard-state
      management, and initiate queries only on actual state updates.

      OOPS supports soft and hard state mechanisms seamlessly, as
      described in this section. The client determines its desired type
      of state management, and communicates it on an object-by-object
      basis.  A single client can use soft-state for some information,
      and hard state for others.  Furthermore, the OOPS protocol allows
      clients to modify their caching strategies on the fly (without
      having to renegotiate with the server).  While the protocol does
      not impose strategy limitations, a client implementation could
      restrict itself to a more modest and simple combination of soft
      and hard state.

      There are two types of state information that is stored at the
      client:  (a) client state information that was forwarded to the
      server (e.g., policy objects in incoming Path/Resv messages).  (b)
      server state which is cached at the client (e.g., policy results
      computed by the server). The OOPS protocol addresses each of these
      types of states separately:

      2.3.1 Client State Information Cached at the Server

         The client indicates its choice of state management approach by
         setting (or resetting) the OOPS_HardState flag in objects sent
         to the server.  When the client chooses soft-state management,
         policy state for that specific object ages and expires at the
         server according to the specified timeout (refresh-period * K).
         Therefore, the state cached at the server is kept alive by
         constant refreshing (the client must forward ALL incoming RSVP
         messages, whether or not they represent refreshes or updates).
         On the other hand, when indicating a choice of hard-state
         management, the client assumes responsibility for reliably
         informing the server on every policy update.  In this case, the
         state cached at the server would not expire unless explicitly
         modified by the client, or when the communication channel to
         the client breaks. [Note 8]
          The client may refrain from forwarding to the server any
         repeat policy objects (which represent no updated information).

         The client may switch between hard and soft states on the fly
[Note 8] Clearly the channel breaks when either the client or server
become disfunctional or die.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 11]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

         by modifying the OOPS_HardState flag while forwarding input to
         the server.

      2.3.2 Server State Information Cached at the Client

         The client indicate its state management capabilities by
         setting (or resetting) the OOPS_HardState flag in queries sent
         to the server. A choice of soft-state indicates that the client
         is incapable of caching, and it purges the server responses
         after usage (one-time, or disposable results). Clearly, without
         caching, the client must issue a new query each time that
         responses are needed.

         When the server responds to a cached (hard-state) query, it
         assumes responsibility to reliably inform the client about any
         changes that may occur later with the original response to this
         query.  The client may rely on cached results as long as there
         is no change in RSVP's state (which includes incoming policy
         objects), [Note 9]
          and the communication channel with the server is intact.

         The client may switch between hard and soft states on the fly
         by issuing a new query with a modified flag.

      2.3.3 State Change Notification

         State change notification is done by resending the same type as
         the original message but with the modified state instead.

         Client notification example (incoming POLICY_DESC objects for

[Note 9] A configurable option may allow the client to use cached
results even when some RSVP state changes.  There is a clear trade-off
here between fast and accurate policy processing, however, given that
the server is up, and that authorization was already granted previously
for that RSVP flow, some may find it a reasonable policy approach.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 12]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

                                  TYPE           DATA
                                  ----           ----
         CLIENT ==> SERVER:       NOTIFY:INPUT   RESV-X: PD-1

         Time passes; the input POLICY_DESC object associated with
         Resv-X changed to PD-2.

         CLIENT ==> SERVER:       NOTIFY:INPUT   RESV-X: PD-2

         Server notification example (status query for reservation

                                  TYPE            DATA
                                  ----            ----

         Time passes; the status of Resv-X changed to "reject".


      2.3.4 State Re-synchronization

         Both client and server may re-synchronize their respective
         states at any time during the connection. The reset initiator
         sends a Bye-Notification with a RESET code, and the receiver
         responds with a Bye-Notification with the same code.  After
         this exchange, all cached state becomes soft, and a new logical
         connection is reestablished (beginning with Connection-
         Initiation-Query,...). New/hard state gradually replaces
         old/soft state as described in Section 2.3.4.

   2.4 Error Handling

      We distinguish between two types of possible errors; policy errors
      and protocol errors.

      2.4.1 Protocol Errors

         Protocol errors (e.g., missing or bad parameters) do not reveal
         either positive or negative policy decisions and are therefore
         neutral (represented as SNUBs). [Note 10]
[Note 10] This neutrality allows, when appropriate, other valid sub-
policy elements to support an accept decision.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 13]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

         It is recommended (although not required) that all local status
         processing at the client be completed before querying the
         server.  This allows the server to immediately commit the
         transaction rather than having to wait until the client is
         done.  (See the Client-Status-Notification Op-Code.)

         Some OOPS protocol errors may only affect the OOPS protocol
         processing or simply be logged. Other errors may escalate to
         become policy errors (e.g., a bad POLICY_DESC is reported as a
         policy error).

      2.4.2 Policy Errors

         Policy errors are reported in a sub-policy element specific
         format. These elements are encapsulated in POLICY_DESC objects
         and are forwarded toward the originator (cause) of the error.
         In most cases, a negative Status-Response initiates an
         automatic error response (e.g., RSVP ResvErr or PathErr),
         however, OOPS allows reporting of other error situations by
         scheduling an explicit error message (using the Protocol-
         Message-Notification op-code).  (See [Ext] for more about the
         rules governing error reporting).

         Consider a scenario where two receivers R1 and R2 listen to a
         multicast transmission from S1. A reservation sent by R1 is
         propagated upstream until it reaches node A, where it
         encounters a policy rejection.

                                            B--------------A----------- S1
                          / \             |
           R2------------+   \            |
                              \           |
                              PS1        PS2

                   Figure 3: An Error Reporting Scenario

         The following table describes a subset of the relevant
         signaling which begins with reservation initiation by R1 and R2
         and ends by R1 receiving the appropriate error response.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 14]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

From/To   Message                                    Comments
R1->B     Resv [PD1]
R2->B     Resv [PD2]
B->PS1    OOPS-Incoming-Policy-Query[PD1,PD2]        ;B queries PS1
          OOPS-Outgoing-Policy-Query? [Resv]
PS1->B    OOPS-Status-Response: ACCEPT
B->A      Resv [PD3]                                 ;B forwards the Resv to A
A->PS2    OOPS-Incoming-Policy-Query[PD3]            ;A queries PS2
PS2->A    OOPS-Status-Response: SNUB (reject)        ;PS2 reject the reservation
A->PS2    OOPS-Outgoing-Policy-Query? [ResvErr]      ;PS2 provides error PD
PS2->A    OOPS-Outgoing-Policy-Response [PD1-E]
A->B      ResvErr [PD1-E]                            ;A sends back ResvErr to B
B->PS1    OOPS-Incoming-Policy-Query[PD1-E]
          OOPS-Outgoing-Policy-Query? [ResvErr]      ;PS1 builds error PD
PS1->B    OOPS-Outgoing-Policy-Response[PD1-E'],R1   ; (directed to R1 only)
B->R1     ResvErr [PD1-E']                           ;B sends back ResvErr to R1

          Figure 4: Error Reporting Signaling

         All error information is carried in POLICY_DESC objects (as
         sub-policy elements). OOPS server may read and modify this
         information along the ResvErr path; it may also direct the
         error responses only to the relevant branches of the reserved
         tree (in this scenario, the error is associated with R1 but not
         with R2).

3. Client-Server Connection

   The following section describes the fundamentals of client-server
   connection: establishment, channel, and termination.

   3.1 Connection Establishment

      OOPS uses a well known port number (OOPS = 3288) for incoming
      connection requests. Usually, the client would attempt to
      establish a TCP connection to its preferred policy server,
      however, both client and server listen to the OOPS port. [Note 11]

[Note 11] New (or recovering) policy servers are allowed to notify
clients on their existence by issuing a TCP connection request to the
client's OOPS port number.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 15]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

      Regardless of who initiated the TCP connection, once the
      connection is in place, the OOPS logical connection establishment
      is always initiated by the client and is performed through a two
      way handshake.

      o    Communication Initiation by the Client

           The client sends a Connection-Initiation-Query to the server.
           This message identifies the client to the server and provides
           the basic characteristics of the client as well as a list of
           policy responses that are acceptable to the client. This list
           is in decreasing order of acceptability, and terminates with
           the default element.

      o    Response by the Server

           The server responds with a Connection-Accept-Response to
           connect to the client. It may also respond with a
           Connection-Reject-Response to refuse and disconnect from the

           After connection establishment both the client and server
           know the set of sub-policies that the client can send to the
           server, which one of them should handle default
           (unrecognized) sub-policies, as well as the format of status
           responses from server to client.  They also establish the
           Channel-Hold period which is determined as the minimum
           between the two values declared in the handshake messages,
           but must be at least 3 seconds.

      3.1.1 Reliable Communication

         We expect TCP to provide us with reliable, in-order delivery of
         packets.  Given that TCP is responsible for all the time
         critical network operations, reliability errors are assumed to
         be virtually nonexistent.

      3.1.2 Secure Communications

         OOPS relies on standard protocols for security of client-server
         communications. An emerging standard protocol IPSEC [IPSEC] is
         the mechanism of choice for ensuring either integrity or
         secrecy.  The use of IPSEC and/or other security protocols is
         transparent to OOPS.

   3.2 Connection Termination

      This section describes the handling of communication breakdown.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 16]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

      3.2.1 Implicit Termination

         The communication channel may be unexpectedly disconnected
         because of a misbehaving client or server, network split, or
         for other reasons.  Both client and server must be able to
         detect such channel failures and act accordingly.  Consider the
         case where OOPS is used for quota enforcement.  The server may
         approve a reservation while debiting X/min from a local
         account. If the OOPS communication channel breaks, it is
         critical for the server to detect the break and stop debiting
         this account.

         The OOPS protocol relies on Keep-Alive messages to provide
         application-level communication-channel verification. [Note 12]

         Implicitly, the communications channel is assumed to be
         disconnected after it has been idle (no message was received on
         it) for more than a Channel-Hold period (see Section 3.1).
         Keep-Alive messages are sent by both client and server as
         needed [Note 13]
          to ensure the liveness of the connection (to prevent a
         Channel-Hold timeout). Keep-Alive messages are not

      3.2.2 Explicit Termination

         The client (or server) may terminate the connection by sending
         a Bye-Notification, and wait until either it receives an echoed
         Bye-Notification or the Channel-Hold period had passed. In
         between, it should ignore incoming messages (and not reset the
         Channel-Hold timer).

         At the opposite side, when a client (or server) receive a Bye-
         Notification message, it should echo it, and close the

[Note 12] OOPS implementations may utilize system dependent mechanisms
for detecting broken TCP connections, but does not rely on them. This is
especially important since a server may be in a dysfunctional state
while its TCP connection is still open and viable.

[Note 13] When the intermediate period in between two OOPS messages
approaches the Channel-Hold time.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 17]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

      3.2.3 Post Termination

         Soft-state has an inherent cleanup mechanism; when the channel
         disconnects, the soft-state begins to age until it eventually
         expires (using the same mechanism and refresh-period * K used
         by RSVP).

         In contrast, hard-state is assumed to be valid unless
         explicitly modified. However, when the channel disconnects such
         an explicit notification is not possible.  Clearly, purging all
         state immediately upon disconnection is not an acceptable
         approach since should cause disruption of service and would not
         allow enough time to contact an alternate server.  OOPS uses
         the following simple rule:

         When the communication channel disconnects, all hard state
         associated with it is assumed to be soft-state that had been
         refreshed recently.

      3.2.4 Switching to An Alternative Server

         We assume that as part of their local configuration, clients
         obtain a list of policy servers and site specific selection
         criteria. This list can be the basis for server switching

         A switch to an alternate server may be triggered by a voluntary
         disconnection (i.e., Bye-Notification) or an unexpected break
         in the communication channel.  During normal operations, the
         client may wish to switch to an alternate server (for any
         reason). The client is advised to first connect to the new
         server before sending a Bye-Notification to the original one.
         If the communication channel unexpectedly disconnects, the
         client should quickly attempt to connect to an alternate

         In both cases, after the connection to a new server [Note 14]
          is established, the aging cached state from the old server
         would be gradually replaced by responses from the new server.
         [Note 15]
[Note 14] The term "new server" may be the same as the "previous
server"; it may happen that the connection encounters a problem and the
client chooses to disconnected and re-established the connection.

[Note 15] The client could speed-up replacement of cached state by
sending copies of cached input to the server and issuing repeated
queries, on connection establishment (instead of waiting until objects

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 18]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

         As general guidelines, state replacement from a new server
         should not cause a disruption of service that would not
         otherwise occur (if a new server was not found). [Note 16]

         After switching to an alternate server, the client may
         periodically poll its old (preferred) server by attempting a
         TCP connection to its OOPS port. Similarly, a new (or recovered
         server) may notify clients about its liveness by attempting to
         connect to their OOPS port. In the latter case, clients may
         disconnect the TCP connection or respond with a Connection-
         Initiation-Query as if the client initiated the connection in
         the first place. [Note 17]

          %% ----------------------------------------------------
          %%The client may choose to use both the main and the alternate
          %%in tandem. In this case, the client would send inputs and
         updates to
          %%both servers, but will make status and outgoing-policy
         queries only
          %%to the main server. Given that both servers have the same
         state image,
          %%a switch between them could be fast without causing
         disruption of

4. OOPS Message Format

   OOPS messages serve as a wrapper that may include one or more Op-
   Codes; the message wrapper allows common operation (e.g., MD5
   integrity, HOP_DESCs, protocol version, etc.) to be performed and
   verified in one-shot. All OOPS messages are composed of the following

arrive from RSVP).

[Note 16] Practically, this means that as long as there is no change in
RSVP messages, the client is advised to choose between cached and new
results in favor of authorizing the request.

[Note 17] Future version of this document may include the use of
multicast to advertise the liveness of servers.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 19]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

   |    Ver        |  #Op-Codes    |  Flags        |    //////     |
   |                  Message Length                               |
   |                  Message Sequence Number                      |
   |                  OOPS_MSG_AUTH (Optional)                     |
   |                  List of Op-Codes...                          |

   Version: 8 bits

        Protocol version number. The current version is 1.

   Flags: 8 bits

        0x01 H_Integrity_Checked      POLICY_DESC Integrity already checked by client
        0x02 H_Hops_Checked           Prev/Next HOPs already checked by client

   #Op-Codes: 8 bits

        Number of Op-Codes included in this message.

   Message Length: 32 bits

        The total length of this OOPS message in bytes.

   Message Sequence Number: 32 bits

        The sequence number of the message being sent.

   OOPS_MSG_AUTH (optional): variable length

        This Message Authenticator provides integrity verification based
        on a shared-keyed message digest. The message digest is
        calculated over the entire OOPS message.

        There is only one object format currently defined is identical
        to the RSVP INTEGRITY object (defined in [Bak96]).

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 20]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

   List of OOPS operation codes (Op-Codes): variable length

        Described in the following section.

   4.1 OOPS Operation Codes (Op-Codes)

      Each OOPS message may contain multiple OOPS operations each
      encapsulating a different query, response or notification.  For
      example, multiple Incoming-Policy-Queries might be followed by a
      Status-Query operation in the same message.

      Individual OOPS Op-Codes have the following header:

      | Operation Code| Op. Subtype   |  Flags        |    //////     |
      |                      Length (bytes)                           |
      |                      Refresh Period                           |

      The operation header has the following fields:

      operation Code: 8 bits

           The type of OOPS operation.

      Operation Subtype: 8 bits

           This field can be used to indicate an attribute of the Op-
           Code, such as its version; currently it is always set to 1.

      Flags: 8 bits

           0x01 OOPS_HardState:   Hard State (soft-state if not set (0) )
           0x02 OOPS_Shared   :   Resv shared among sources as filter specs
           0x02 OOPS_FullList :   Last in the set of status queries.

      Length: 32 bits

           Contains the total operation length in bytes (including

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 21]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

      Refresh Period

           The refresh-period associates with this object (e.g., RSVP's
           refresh period).

      The remainder of this section describes the set of operations that
      may appear in OOPS messages and their object format.  OOPS does
      not bind itself to a particular protocol (i.e., RSVP) and is built
      around objects that may belong to different (other) protocols. The
      current draft is based on the assumption that RSVP would be one
      (the first) of these protocols and thus, the draft provides the
      appropriate RSVP objects format.

      4.1.1 Null-Notification (a.k.a Keep-Alive)

         Operation Type = 0, sub-type = 1

         <Null-Notification> ::= <Common OOPS header>

         This empty or null notification triggers no operation; thus,
         can be used as as Keep-Alive signal to test the viability of
         the communication channel between client and server (see
         Section 3.2.1).

      4.1.2 Connection-Initiation-Query

         Operation Type = 1, sub-type = 1

         <Connection-Initiation-Query> ::=  <Common OOPS header>

         The client sends this query to establish a connection with a
         server. This message is sent following the establishment of a
         transport connection (TCP).

         o    CONNECT_DESC

              Description of connection parameters.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 22]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

         o    CLASS_ID

              The client's class provides an implicit description of the
              client's capabilities and requirements; the CLASS_ID is an
              index into the class list maintained by the server; it is
              used in conjunction with the CLIENT_ID.)

         o    CLIENT_ID

              The network address of the client.  From the combination
              of CLIENT_ID and CLASS_ID the server can learn about the
              set of sub-policies it is required to support for this
              particular client; it can also learn which of these sub-
              policies are optional and which are mandatory.

         o    RESP_INT

              A list of possible response interfaces.

         o    COOKIE

      4.1.3 Connection-Accept-Response

         Operation Type = 2, sub-type = 1

         <Connection-Accept-Response> ::=  <Common OOPS header>

         The server sends this response to accept a client's connection
         connection request.

         o    CONNECT_DESC

         o    PLIST

              Each "From Policy m" and "To Policy m" pair represent a
              range of sub-policies that the server is willing to

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 23]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997


         o    RESP_INT

              The chosen (agreed upon) status response interface.

         o    COOKIE

      4.1.4 Connection-Reject-Response

         Operation Type = 3, sub-type = 1

         <Connection-Reject-Response> ::=  <Common OOPS header>

         The server sends this response to reject a client's connection
         initiation. It specifies both reason code and text.

      4.1.5 Bye-Notification

         Operation Type = 4, sub-type = 1

         <Bye-Notification> ::= <Common OOPS header>

         This message is used by either client or server to terminate
         the OOPS connection.

         o    BYE_DESC

         (Section 3.2.2 includes a description of explicit termination
         using Bye-Notification)

      4.1.6 Incoming-Policy-Query

         Operation Type = 5, sub-type = 1

         <Incoming-Policy-Query> ::=  <Common OOPS header>

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 24]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

                                      <SRC_DESC list>
                                      <POLICY_DESC list>

         This operation is used to forward POLICY_DESC objects from the
         client to the server.  Selection between hard and soft state
         management is reflected in the OOPS_HardState flag.  The other
         fields are copied from the PC_InPolicy() function called by
         RSVP. (See [Ext]).

      4.1.7 Incoming-Policy-Response

         Operation Type = 6, sub-type = 1

         <Incoming-Policy-Response> ::=  <Common OOPS header>

         Incoming-Policy-Response is used ONLY to report protocol errors
         (e.g., syntax) found with incoming policy objects.  (it is not
         used in the normal operation of the protocol).

      4.1.8 Outgoing-Policy-Query

         Operation Type = 7, sub-type = 1

         <Outgoing-Policy-Query> ::=  <Common OOPS header>
                                      <SRC_DESC list>
                                      <HOP_DESC list>

         This operation queries the server for a set of outgoing policy
         objects for a set of HOP_DESCs.  The client can choose between
         hard and soft state management through the OOPS_HardState flag.
         When hard state is selected, the client caches copies of the
         outgoing objects and assumes they remain valid unless
         explicitly modified by the server.

      4.1.9 Outgoing-Policy-Response

         Operation Type = 8, sub-type = 1

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 25]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

         <Outgoing-Policy-Response> ::=  <Common OOPS header>
                                         { <HOP_DESC>
                                           <ERR_DESC> or <POLICY_DESC>
                                         } pairs list

         The  <Query Sequence Number> links the response to the original query.

         In the response, the server provides a list of triplets, one
         for each outgoing HOP_DESC (For Path messages, only the LIH
         part is significant). Each triplet contains a list of policy
         objects for that hop and an error description.

         The OOPS server can block an outgoing RSVP message by replacing
         the outgoing POLICY_DESC list for a particular HOP_DESC with an
         <Error-Description> with an appropriate value.

         The ability to block outgoing RSVP control messages is
         especially useful when policy is enforcement is performed at
         border nodes of a network; RSVP control messages that are
         allowed through are capable of installing state at internal
         nodes without being subject to further policy control.

      4.1.10 Status-Query

         Operation Type = 9, sub-type = 1

         <Status_Query> ::=  <Common OOPS header>
                             <SRC_DESC list>
                             { <HOP_DESC>
                             } triplets list

         This operation queries the server for status results of a list
         of LIHs.  The client can choose between hard and soft state
         management through the OOPS_HardState flag. When hard state is
         selected, the client caches the status results and assumes they
         remain valid unless explicitly modified by the server.

         In the upstream direction (e.g., Resv) status may need to be
         checked on multiple LIHs (all reservations for a flow). In such
         cases, status queries can be perform separately for each LIH,
         once for all LIHs, or anything in between. Flag OOPS_FullList
         must be set at the last of status query of the series. [Note 18]
[Note 18] When sub-policies are interdependent across LIHs (as when the
cost is shared among downstream receivers), flag OOPS_FullList notifies
the server that the list of reserved LIH is complete and that it can
safely compute the status of these reservations.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 26]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

      4.1.11 Status-Response

         Operation Type = 10, sub-type = 1

         <Status-Response> ::=  <Common OOPS header>
                                { <HOP_DESC>
                                } triplet list

         The  <Q_ASSOC> links the response to the original query.

         In the response, the server provides a list of triplets, each
         of which contains an LIH, status, and any applicable error
         results.  The set of LIHs is an attribute of the results and
         not of the query; the server is allowed to respond with a
         superset of LIHs specified in the original query, as in the
         following example:

                             SEQ#  TYPE           DATA
                             ---   ----           ----
         Client ==> Server:  150   Query:status   Q_ASSOC=ID2, Resv-X, LIH={2}
         Server ==> Client:  153   Resp :status   Q_ASSOC=ID2, {2,rej}

         Two new reservations arrive, carrying new policy data objects:

         Client ==> Server:  160   Query:status   Q_ASSOC=ID3, Resv-X, LIH={4,7}
         Server ==> Client:  169   Resp :status   Q_ASSOC=ID3, {2,acc;4,acc;7,rej}

      4.1.12 Delete-State-Notification

         Operation Type = 11, sub-type = 1

         <Delete-State-Notification> ::=  <Common OOPS header>
                                          [<SRC_DESC list>]

         o    STATE_OP_DESC

              This object describes the type of requested operation (see
              Appendix A).

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 27]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

         This operation informs the sender about an immediate RSVP
         teardown of state caused by PATH_TEAR, RESV_TEAR, routes
         change, etc.  As a result, the server should ignore the
         described state as if it was never received from the client.

         Despite its name, this operation can be used to switch between
         blockaded and non-blockaded state.

         The semantics of this operation is described for PC_DelState()
         in [Ext].

         Error description is used to provide the server with a reason
         for the delete (for logging purposes).

      4.1.13 Protocol-Message-Notification

         Operation Type = 12, sub-type = 1

         <Protocol-Message-Notification> ::=  <Common OOPS header>
                                              <SRC_DESC list>

         The operation results in the generation of an outgoing protocol
         message (e.g., RSVP's Path, Resv).  The client should schedule
         the requested message to the specified HOP_DESC.

      4.1.14 Client-Status-Notification

         Operation Type = 13, sub-type = 1

         <Client-Status-Notification> ::=  <Common OOPS header>

         The Client notifies the server about the status results
         computed at the client (that may also include results from
         other servers, if policy computation is spread among several

         The overall status of an RSVP flow is computed by merging the
         client's status report with the server's. The server should not
         commit a transaction (e.g., charge an account) before knowing
         its final status. The Client-Status-Results operation can be
         sent with the query, if the client computed its status prior to
         making the query. It can also be sent later, after the server
         sent its response to the status query.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 28]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

      4.1.15 Error-Notification

         Operation Type = 14, sub-type = 1

         <Message-Error-Notification> ::=  <Common OOPS header>

         Message-Error-Notification can be used by either client or
         server to report errors associated with an entire message (as
         opposed to a specific operation). Error-Notification may be
         triggered by both syntax or substantive errors (e.g., failure
         to verify the integrity of the message).

         <Message-Sequence-Number> identified the message that triggered
         the error. It uses identical format to the one used by the OOPS
         message header.

         Message-Error-Notification is not acked.

5. Acknowledgment

   This document reflects feedback from Paul Amsden, Fred Baker, Lou
   Berger, Bob Braden, Ron Cohen, Deborah Estrin, Steve Jackowski, Tim
   O'Malley, Claudio Topolcic, Raj Yavatkar, and many other IPC and RSVP

6. Authors' Address

   Shai Herzog              Phone: (917) 318-7938
   IP"Highway"                Email: herzog@iphighway.com

   Dimitrios Pendarakis     Phone: (914) 784-7536
                            Email: dimitris@watson.ibm.com
   Raju Rajan               Phone: (914) 784-7260
                            Email: raju@watson.ibm.com
   Roch Guerin              Phone: (914) 784-7038
                            Email: guerin@watson.ibm.com

   IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
   P.O. Box 704
   Yorktown Heights, NY 10598

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 29]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

7. References


[IPSEC]  R. Atkinson, Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol,
    "RFC1825", Aug. 1997.

[Bak96]  F. Baker.  RSVP Cryptographic Authentication "Internet-Draft",
    draft-ietf-rsvp-md5-02.txt, 1996.

[RSVPSP]  R. Braden, L. Zhang, S. Berson, S. Herzog, and S. Jamin,
    Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) Version 1 Functional
    Specification.  "Internet-Draft", draft-ietf-RSVPSP-14.[ps,txt],
    Nov. 1996.

[Arch]  S. Herzog Accounting and Access Control Policies for Resource
    Reservation Protocols. "Internet-Draft", draft-ietf-rsvp-policy-
    arch-01.[ps,txt], Nov. 1996.

[LPM]  S. Herzog Local Policy Modules (LPM): Policy Enforcement for
    Resource Reservation Protocols. "Internet-Draft", draft-ietf-rsvp-
    policy-lpm-01.[ps,txt], Nov. 1996.

[Ext]  S. Herzog RSVP Extensions for Policy Control.  "Internet-Draft",
    draft-ietf-rsvp-policy-ext-02.[ps,txt], Apr. 1997.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 30]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

A Appendix: OOPS Objects

This section describes objects that are used within OOPS OP-Codes.  All
objects have a common header:

|            Length             |      Class    |   C-Type      |

Length describes the length of the entire object, in bytes.  Class
describes the type of object and C-Type describes the a class sub-type.

o    CLASS_ID class

     -    Class = 1, C-Type = 1

          |   ASCII String ........ 0 Padded to multiples of 32 bits      |

o    CLIENT_ID class

     -    Class = 2, C-Type = 1

          A Network Address.

          |   IPv4 Address                                                |

     -    Class = 2, C-Type = 2

          |   IPv6 Address                                                |
          |                                                               |
          |                                                               |
          |                                                               |

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 31]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

     From the combination of Client-ID and Class-Indicator the server
     can learn about the set of sub-policies it is required to support
     for this particular client; it can also learn which of these sub-
     policies are optional and which are mandatory.

o    RESP_INT class

     -    Class = 3, C-Type = 1

          | Most-Prefered |.....          |               |               |
          |               | Least-Pref.   |...0 Padded to 32 bit multiples|

o    COOKIE class

     -    Class = 4, C-Type = 1

          Currently, no values are defined.

o    PLIST class

     -    Class = 5, C-Type = 1

          |          Number (or pairs)    |             //////            |
          |          From Policy 1        |         To Policy 1           |
          |          From Policy n        |         To Policy n           |

     Each "From Policy m" and "To Policy m" pair represent a range of

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 32]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

     sub-policies that the server is willing to support.

o    ERR_DESC class

     -    Class = 6, C-Type = 1

          | Error-Code    |     //////    |        Reason Code            |
          |   Error ASCII String .... 0 Padded to multiples of 32 bits    |

     Detailed Error-Code and Reason-Codes would be defined in future
     versions of this document.

o    Q_ASSOC class

     -    Class = 7, C-Type = 1

          |                      Client-Specific Semantics                |
          //                        (Variable Length)                    //
          |                                                               |

          The client-specific contents of this object is opaque to the
          server; it is set by the client for a query and is echoed by
          the server as-is. The client must store enough information
          there that will enable it to uniquely identify the original
          query when the response arrive. This must at least include a
          counter to identify the version of the latest query. [Note 19]

[Note 19] A simple association could be the combination of a pointer to
an internal client (router) control-block that describes the query, and
a query version counter.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 33]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

o    PROT_MSG_TYPE class

     -    Class = 8, C-Type = 1

          |               RSVP MSG TYPE                                   |

          Values specified in [RSVPSP].

o    DST_DESC class

     -    Class = 9, C-Type = 1

          The RSVP SESSION object as defined in [RSVPSP].

o    SRC_DESC class

     -    Class = 10, C-Type = 1

          The RSVP FILTER_SPEC object as defined in [RSVPSP].

o    HOP_DESC class

     -    Class = 11, C-Type = 1

          The RSVP_HOP object as defined in [RSVPSP].

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 34]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

o    ADV_DESC class

     -    Class = 12, C-Type = 1

          The RSVP ADSPEC object as defined in [RSVPSP].

o    QOS_DESC class

     -    Class = 13, C-Type = 1

          The RSVP FLOWDESC object as defined in [RSVPSP].

o    POLICY_DESC class

     -    Class = 14, C-Type = 1

          The RSVP POLICY_DATA object as defined in [Ext] and [RSVPSP].

o    OOPS_MSG_AUTH class

     -    Class = 15, C-Type = 1

          The RSVP INTEGRITY object as defined in [RSVPSP] and [Bak96].

o    STATUS_DESC class

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 35]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

     -    Class = 16, C-Type = 1

          | Results       |   Priority    |             //////            |

          Results may have one of the following values:

          1 :         Accept
          2 :         Snub
          3 :         Veto

          Priority ranges between 1..255 (see 2.2.3).

o    CONNECT_DESC class

     -    Class = 17, C-Type = 1

          This object describes the OOPS connection parameters; in the
          Connection-Accept-Response, the refresh-multiplier is an echo
          of the value received with the Connection-Initiation-Query.

          |  Version      |  Flags        | Refresh-Mult. |    //////     |
          | Max-Msg-Size (in KBytes)      | Channel-Hold period (in sec.) |

          Ver: 8 bits

               Currently, version 1.


               0x01  OOPS_CONNECT_DefaultC     Client handles default sub-policies.


Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 36]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

               The refresh-period multiplier (e.g., RSVP's K value).

          Max-Msg-Size: Upper limit on the length of an OOPS message

          Channel-Hold period: Implicit disconnection timeout

o    BYE_DESC class

     -    Class = 18, C-Type = 1

          BYE_DESC provides details about the Bye-Notification request.

          |   Bye-Flags   |   //////      |      BYE_DELAY (seconds)      |

          0x01     An echo (response) to a received Bye-Notification

          The BYE_DELAY could provide both sides with some time delay to
          be better prepared to a pending bye. [Note 20]
           The delay value is determined by the originator of the bye-
          notification, and is echoed in the bye response. The delay
          effect should be as if the Bye-Notification was sent BYE_DELAY
          seconds later with a delay timer value of 0.

o    STATE_OP_DESC class

     -    Class = 19, C-Type = 1

[Note 20] Similar to the delayed shutdown command known in Unix.

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 37]

Internet Draft       OOPS: Policy Protocol for RSVP            Apr. 1997

          |   Op-Type     |                      //////                   |

          Op-Type values:

          1 :         Delete State
          2 :         Block State
          3 :         Unblock State

B Appendix: Error Codes

This appendix describes an initial list of error codes available in
OOPS, as well as the set of Reason Codes for each error code.  (Reason
Code of 0 must be used when Reason Codes are not applicable).  This list
should evolve and not be considered conclusive. [Note 21]

o    Code = 1, Connection Management

     1:  Connection Reject: Server does not support client version.
     2:  Bye: Reset due to routine state re-synchronization
     3:  Bye: Reset due to connection problems (Bad message formats)

o    Code = 2, Protocol problems

     1:  Syntax: Bad OOPS message
     2:  Syntax: Bad OOPS Op-Code
     3:  Syntax: Bad POLICY_DESC format

o    Code = 3, Policy Decisions

     1:  Don't forward: refrain from forwarding an outgoing message.
     2:  Policy Reject: cancel protocol operation (Reservation, path, etc.)

o     Code = 4, State Management

     1:  Delete State: Reservation Canceled
     2:  Delete State: route change
     3:  Delete State: State Timeout
     4:  Blockade State
     5:  Unblock State

Shai Herzog et al.       Expiration: Oct. 1997                 [Page 38]