Service Location James Kempf
INTERNET DRAFT Sun Microsystems
September 15, 2000 Jason Goldschmidt
Bucknell University
Notification and Subscription for SLP
draft-kempf-srvloc-notify-04.txt
Status of This Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are work-
ing documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its
areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also dis-
tribute 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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at:
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at:
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Abstract
The Service Location Protocol provides mechanisms whereby service agent
clients can advertise and user agent clients can query for services.
The design is very much demand-driven, so that user agents only obtain
service information when they specifically ask for it. There exists
another class of user agent applications, however, that requires
notification when a new service appears or disappears. In the RFC 2608
design, these applications are forced to poll the network to catch
changes. In this document, we describe a protocol for allowing such
clients to be notified when a change occurs, removing the need for
polling.
1. Introduction
The Service Location Protocol (SLP)[1] provides a mechanism
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 1]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
for service agent (SA) clients to advertise network services and for
user agent (UA) clients to find them. The mechanism is demand-driven.
UAs obtain service information by actively querying for it, and do not
obtain any information unless they do so. While this design satisfies
the requirements for most applications, there are some applications
that require more timely information about the appearance or
disappearance in the services of interest.
Ideally, these applications would like to be notified when a new service
comes up or when a service disappears. In order to obtain this
information with SLP as described in RFC 2608, such applications must
poll the network to periodically refresh their local cache of available
service advertisements.
An example of such a client is a desktop GUI that wants to display
network service icons as soon as they appear to provide users with an
accurate picture of all services available to them.
Because polling is inefficient and wasteful of network and processor
resources, we would like to provide these applications a mechanism
whereby they can be explicitly notified of changes. In this document,
we describe a scalable mechanism allowing UAs to be notified of changes
in service availability.
2. Notation Conventions
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 RFC 2119 [2].
3. Terminology
In this section, we present some additional terminology beyond
that in [1] and [3].
Notification - A message sent to an interested agent informing that
agent that a service has appeared or disappeared.
Subscription - A request to be informed about changes in service
availability for a particular service type and scopes.
4. Design Considerations
The primary design consideration in a notification protocol for SLP
is that we would like it to exhibit the same high degree of scalability
and robustness that the base SLP protocol exhibits. Notification should
work in small networks with only a few SAs, as well as large enterprise
networks with thousands of SAs and hundreds of DAs. Small networks
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 2]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
should not be required to deploy DAs in order to receive the benefits
of notification. We also want to assure that notification in large
networks does not cause heavy processing loads to fall on any one
particular SLP agent. This requires that the task of notification be
distributed rather than centralized, to avoid loading down one agent
with doing all the notification work. Finally, we would like the
notification scheme to be robust in the face of DA failures, just as
the base SLP design is.
An important consideration is that the UA clients obtain notifications
of SA events in a timely fashion. If a UA has subscribed to notification
for a particular service type, the UA should receive such notification
regardless of the state of intervening DAs. SLP is transparent
with respect to DAs supporting a particular scope; that is, a UA can
use any DA with a particular scope and expect to get the same service
advertisements. Notifications should exhibit the same property. Whether
or not a UA receives a notification should not depend on the DA to
which they happen to connect. This preserves the DAs' identity as a pure
cache.
Another goal is that the notification messages contain enough
information about the triggering event that the UA can determine
whether or not it is of interest in the large majority of cases without
having to issue another SLP request a priori. The UA may, of course,
issue an SLP request for related reasons, but it should not have to
issue a request to obtain more information on the event that triggered
the notification in most cases. This reduces the amount of network
traffic related to the event.
In order to simplify implementation, we would like to use similar
mechanisms for notification in large and small networks. The mechanisms
are not identical, obviously, but we want to avoid having radically
different mechanisms that require completely separate implementations.
Having similar mechanisms reduces the amount of code in UA and SA
clients.
A minor goal is to make use of existing SLP message types and mechanisms
wherever possible. This reduces the amount of code necessary to
implement the notification mechanism, because much code can be reused
between the base SLP and the notification mechanism. In particular, we
expect to make use of the SLP extension mechanism in certain cases
to support subscription.
5. Notification Design Overview
In order to support scalability, we split the design into two parts. A
small network design is used when no DAs are present in the network.
A large network design is used in networks with DAs. The following
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 3]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
subsections describe the two designs.
5.1 Small Network Design
In networks without DAs, UAs are notified by an SA when the SA
initially appears, and when the SA disappears. This allows UAs to know
about the list of service types the SA supports. In small networks,
there is no centralized agent available to administer subscriptions for
newly appearing SAs. This rules out any kind of subscription design
in which a UA subscribes to notifications for a particular service
type in particular scopes of interest, because a newly appearing SA
can't tell whether or not there are any subscriptions without a
centralizing agent to tell it.
As a result, SAs perform notification when they come on line and
when prior to shutting down regardless of their scope or service type,
if they are capable of performing notification. This means that a UA
receives notification of all types of changes for all scopes and
service types, and consequently must be prepared to filter out those
changes in which it is not interested (other scopes, other service
types, or advertisements that are not of interest because the
attributes don't match attributes in which the UA is interested).
The design requires SAs to perform notification by IP multicasting
(or broadcasting if multicast is not available) one or several SLP
SrvReg or SrvDereg messages using the multicast transmit algorithm
described in Section 9.0. The multicast is performed on the SLP
multicast address (239.255.255.253, default TTL 255) and is
administratively scoped in the same manner as SLP [4]. The port number
for notifications is not the default SLP port, because that port is
only accessible to privileged users on some operating systems, but
rather the port <*to be assigned by IANA*>. UAs interested in
notification join the multicast group 239.255.255.253 and listen on
port <*to be assigned by IANA*>.
5.2 Large Network Design
In networks with DAs, a DA supporting a particular scope can act as
an intermediary for administering UA subscriptions. A UA interested
in being notified about changes in a particular service type attaches
the Subscribe extension to a SrvRqst message sent to the DA. The DA
obtains multicast group addresses based on the algorithm described
in Section 8.0 and puts them into a NotifyAt extension which it
attaches to the SrvRply. The UA listens on the group addresses in the
reply for notifications.
When a new subscription comes in, the DA compares the service type
and scopes in the new subscription against a list of existing
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 4]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
subscriptions. If no previous subscription was seen having the same
service type and scopes, the DA multicasts DAAdverts using the multi-
cast transmit algorithm described in Section 9.0 including the
NotifyAt extension. A subscription consists of a service
type and a collection of scopes. A DA MUST keep track of subscriptions
it has arranged as well as subscriptions arranged by other DAs in any
scopes with which the DA is configured. If a subscription request
is made which matches an existing request, the DA does not perform
the multicast NotifyAt, but it does inform new SAs having a service
type and scopes corresponding to the subscription. It does so by
including the NotifyAt in the the reply to their registrations.
The NotifyAt that is multicast when a subscription has not been
seen before informs existing SAs that a UA has requested a subscription
to events involving their service type. If the service type and scopes
match a registration when an SA registers with the DA, the NotifyAt
MUST be included in the SrvAck. The SrvAck MUST be included whenever a
SrvReg matching a subscription is received. If the SAs don't support
notification, they simply ignore the extension. The DA itself must also
perform notification, according to the multicast transmit algorithm,
when a service advertisement times out. Time-out of a service
advertisement results in the DA multicasting a SrvDereg for the
deregistered URL.
As in small networks, notification is performed primarily by SAs.
If an SA receives a DAAdvert or SrvAck with a NotifyAt extension
and the following conditions are met:
1. The SA supports notification.
2. The SA's service type matches the service type in the
NotifyAt extension.
3. The SA's scopes match one of the scopes of the NotifyAt
extension.
then the SA saves the multicast addresses that correspond to the scopes
and service types it supports. The SA MUST perform notification
immediately after the SA has performed the SrvReg or SrvDereg with the
DA. An SA that has detected a DA in its scopes MUST NOT multicast
any notifications unless it receives a NotifyAt extension in a SrvAck
with service type and scopes matching the SA's service type and
scopes.
6. Subscribe Extension
The Subscribe extension has the following format:
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 5]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Extension Type = <TBD> | Extension Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Ex. Len. (ct) | Abs. Type Fl. |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The scope list and service type of the extension are taken from the
accompanying SrvRqst. The abstract type flag indicates whether the
UA is interested in hearing from all SAs advertising concrete
instances of an abstract type [3]. If the flag is 1, The UA is
interested in hearing from all SAs advertising concrete types
having the same abstract type as the type of the SrvRqst. If the
flag is 0, the UA is only interested in hearing from SAs supporting
the particular concrete or simple type in the SrvRqst.
When a DA receives a Subscribe extension for a scopes/service type
combination that it has not previously seen and the extension is not a
resubscription from an existing subscriber, it determines the multicast
addresses to use based on the algorithm described in Section 8.0.
The multicast addresses are then bundled into a NotifyAt along with
the scopes and service type. The DA also includes a lifetime in the
NotifyAt, informing subscribing UAs and notifying SAs how long the
subscription is active. The lifetime is included to prevent old
subscriptions from hanging around after the UA making the subscription
has exited. The NotifyAt is then multicast as part of a DAAdvert
according to the multicast transmission algorithm, and is included in
the SrvRply to the requesting UA.
If the scopes/service type have previously been seen, the DA does
not perform immediate multicast, but waits until new SAs register,
because all existing SAs have been informed of the subscription
previously.
The DA itself is required to perform notification if a service
advertisement times out. This informs the UA that the service
advertisement is no longer valid.
7. NotifyAt Extension
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 6]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Extension Type = <TBD> | Extension Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Ext. Len (ct) | Subscription Lifetime |SGL List Len. \
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|SGL L. Len (ct)| Scope/Group List \
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Length of Service Type Name | Service Type Name \
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The service type name is in the same format as in the SrvRqst. The
scope/group list is a list of scope names and multicast group
addresses, in IPv4 dotted decimal notation. The following ABNF [5]
syntax describes the list:
sglist = sgitem / sgitem "," sglist
sgitem = scope-name ":" ipv4-number
sccope-name = ; See RFC 2608 for the format of scope names.
ipv4-number = 1*3DIGIT 3("." 1*3DIGIT)
An example of a scope/group list is:
eng:239.255.255.42,corp:239.255.255.43
The scope/group list gives the multicast addresses to use for
notifications involving the service type for the given scopes.
The service type name can be a simple type name, an abstract type
name, or a concrete type name. If the name is an abstract type name,
all SAs advertising concrete instances of the abstract type MUST
notify. If the name is a concrete or simple type name, ONLY those SAs
advertising the simple or concrete type MUST notify. A DA that receives
a subscription with the abstract type flag set, MUST include the
abstract type name in all the NotifyAt messages it sends. If
the DA receives a subscription with the abstract type flag not set,
the DA MUST NOT include the abstract type, but rather must include
the concrete type name. If the type name in the SrvRqst is a simple
type, then the abstract type flag in the Subscribe extension MUST
be ignored.
There are three cases in which an agent may receive a NotifyAt
extension: in a SrvRply returned to a UA, in a multicast DAAdvert, and
in a SrvAck returned to an SA. The three subsections below describe
the response in each of these cases.
7.1 NotifyAt received with SrvRply
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 7]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
When a UA sends a SrvRqst with a Subscribe extension, the DA responds
with a SrvRply including a NotifyAt. The DA MUST NOT unicast a
NotifyAt to a UA with any other message and MUST NOT send a
NotifyAt unless a SrvRqst with a Subscribe extension was received.
The UA responds by setting up a multicast listener to the group
addresses included in the extension on the SLP notification port
<*to be assigned by IANA*>. The UA MAY also want to note the expiration
lifetime of the subscription assigned by the DA, and reissue a
subscription before the lifetime expires.
7.2 NotifyAt received with multicast DAAdvert
The DA multicasts a NotifyAt with a DAAdvert using the multicast
transmit algorithm when a UA has requested notification and the scopes
and service type in the subscription were not previously seen. This
message informs existing SAs having the service type and scopes in the
announcement that they should multicast notifications when they
shut down.
A receiving SA participating in notification responds by noting the
multicast address if the service type and scopes match. When
the SA is about to go down, the SA MUST first unicast a SrvDereg
without attribute tag list to its DAs (as per standard SLP), then it
MUST multicast the same SrvDereg message according to the multicast
transmit algorithm. The SA MUST cease performing notification when the
subscription lifetime expires, unless a subsequent NotifyAt is received
prolonging the subscription.
A UA that is performing passive DA detection will naturally also receive
the extension, but the UA SHOULD ignore the extension.
7.3 NotifyAt received with SrvAck
An SA can receive a NotifyAt with a SrvAck when it first comes up
and registers itself with a DA. If the DA has any subscriptions from
UAs for the service type and scopes represented by the SA, it MUST
return a NotifyAt with the SrvAck.
The SA upon receiving the NotifyAt immediately multicasts the
same SrvReg it sent to the DA, according to the multicast transmit
algorithm. The SA MUST only perform the multicast transmit once,
even if it registers with more than one DA and receives the NotifyAt
in reply from more than one. Prior to its demise and after
deregistering with a DA, the SA MUST multicast the same SrvDereg,
as described in Section 7.2.
8. Multicast Address Allocation
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 8]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
Enterprise networks that allow SLP notification SHOULD deploy the
Multicast Address Allocation Architecture (MAAA) including
administratively scoped multicast and Multicast Address Dynamic
Client Allocation Protocol (MADCAP) [6].
If it is not possible to obtain a multicast address for use in
SLP notifications, the SLP multicast address is used.
If the MAAA infrastructure is deployed, DAs and SAs obtain their scope
configuration from MADCAP, because the SLP scopes are the same as the
MADCAP scopes. Each SLP scope MUST correspond to a multicast scope name,
in the sense of [6]. In such a case, a DA allocates, using MADCAP, a
new multicast group address for each new service type/scope pair to
which a UA subscribes. The allocation is made by MADCAP from the
multicast address range for the scope. In this way, only those UAs
interested in the service type and scopes in the subscription receive
the multicast notification. The DA sets up the lease on the multicast
address to correspond with the duration of the subscription. If the
MADCAP server runs out of addresses, the SLP multicast group is used
as a last resort.
For example, if the scope has an address range of 239.1.0.0 through
239.1.255.255, the notification group address for service type X in
scope A is 239.1.0.42 and for service type Y in scope B is 239.1.42.42.
9. Multicast Transmit Algorithm
The DA and SAs use a multicast transmit algorithm similar to that used
for discovering services in SLP, described in RFC 2608 [1], except
the agent performing the notification doesn't wait for replies.
The agent performing the notification transmits a notification message
once, or at most, a very few times, backing off exponentially in time.
Subsequent multicasts of notification have progressively smaller TTLs.
The TTL on each retransmission is divided by the corresponding number
in the sequence 16, 8, 2, so that the sequence of TTLs is 255, 16, 2, 1
with 4 messages.
A notification message is either a SrvReg or a SrvDereg message,
depending on whether the SA is registering a new service or
deregistering a service. When a new service is registered, the
SrvReg message MUST have the fresh bit set in the SLP header The
entire list of attributes for the service SHOULD be included. The
SrvDereg message MUST not include an attribute tag list. Notifications
MUST not be transmitted at any other time, to minimize multicast
traffic.
Since a SrvReg could contain attribute lists of arbitrary length, the
message could potentially overflow the packet MTU for UDP. If an
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 9]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
attribute list causes a packet MTU overflow, the transmitting
agent MUST set the overflow bit in the SLP header. The attribute list
in the notification message MUST be formatted so that a UA can use the
attributes even if an overflow occurs. If a UA needs more attributes
than are transmitted in the notification message, it can contact the
SA (if no DA is present) or the DA for the attributes it needs.
A DA also multicasts a DAAdvert when a subscription comes in for
containing a service type and scopes that do not match any on the
DA's list of known subscriptions. The same algorithm should be
used. If the combination of the DA attributes and the NotifyAt
message cause the DAAdvert to overflow a UDP packet, DA attributes
MUST be truncated to allow the NotifyAt to fit and the overflow
bit must be set in the header. Multiple DAAdvert messages MUST NOT be
multicast. An SA knows that the purpose of the message is to inform it
of a new subscription rather than for passive advertisement, because
of the extension, and it can therefore ignore the DA attribute list
field if the overflow bit is set in the header. A DA also transmits a
SrvDereg message when a service advertisement is deregistered due to
timeout.
10.0 DA Disappearance
Robustness to DA failure is an important goal of the design.
When a DA disappears due to unforeseen circumstances, subscription
information from UAs is lost. UAs continue to get notifications from
existing SAs. However, new SAs will not be informed of the subscription
unless other DAs also have the subscription information. Because a UA
may not discover a new DA until it tries to perform an active request,
the UA could potentially miss the appearance of new services. For this
reason, UAs that are concerned about receiving notification of
absolutely every service that appears SHOULD issue subscriptions to
every newly discovered DA that supports the scopes it supports.
Similarly, if a DA disappears through controlled shutdown, a UA
performing passive discovery can detect the shutdown and reissue the
subscription to an alternate DA.
To avoid missing subscriptions from UAs that do not subscribe with
all DAs, DAs MUST track notification messages in the scopes they
support. To avoid multiple multicast NotifyAt messages, a DA MUST wait
a random amount of time, uniformly distributed between 0 and 3 seconds
before they send the multicast DAAdvert with NotifyAt. During this
period, the DA MUST listen for NotifyAt messages that match the one
from the new subscription. If a matching NotifyAt is detected, the DA
MUST not multicast.
On the SA side, when a DA goes down, existing SAs continue to notify
until the subscription expires. Before ceasing to notify, an SA MUST
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 10]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
determine whether the DA is still active and, if not, verify with
another DA whether the subscription has been extended. If no other DA
is available, the SA MUST ignore the subscription expiration time and
continue notifying until a new DA is discovered. When a new DA
is discovered the SA must send a new SrvReg to the DA, according
to RFC 2608 [1]. The replying SrvAck contains a NotifyAt extension
if the UA has renewed its subscription with the DA. If the SrvAck does
not contain a NotifyAt message the SA MUST continue to notify until the
subscription expires. If a UA is interested in continuing the
notification, it renews the subscription prior to the expiration
of the old one, and so the SA is informed to continue notifying.
Note that this procedure still does not inform SAs that come up before
the UA has renewed its subscription with a newly booted DA. If this
situation is of concern, multiple DAs can be used to assure that all
subscriptions are covered when a DA goes down.
11. Network Administration Considerations
In SLP networks with DAs as described in RFC 2608, the only multicast
is the SrvRqst for DAAdverts performed during active DA discovery, and
unsolicited DAAdverts sent periodically by the DA for passive
discovery. There is no multicast involved in UA queries or SA
registrations. This allows network administrators to set up DAs for a
particular collection of IP subnets and confine all service discovery
traffic to unicast between the SA and UA clients and the DA.
Administratively scoped multicast can additionally be used to limit
the extent of active DA discovery and passive DA advertising. The
amount of multicast involved is not high and DHCP DA and scope
configuration can be used to limit which the DAs a particular UA or SA
client sees, or to inhibit multicast entirely so that UAs and SAs only
use configured DAs.
With notification, however, multicast traffic involving events in SAs
becomes available. Because DAs request multicast addresses based on
scope and service type, the multicast associated with particular events
should only propagate to those subnets in which UAs and SAs of the same
scope are interacting. Routers should be configured with administrative
multicast scoping to limit multicast. If DAs are not deployed (or the
MAAA is not deployed), however, the amount of multicast on the SLP
multicast address when notifications are being used could quickly
become very large. Therefore, it is crucial that DAs supporting
notification be deployed in large networks where UA clients are
interested in notification.
12. Security Considerations
The SrvReg and SrvDereg messages contain authentication blocks for
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 11]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
all SLP SPIs supported by the DAs with which the SA registers. Since
these SPIs are necessarily the same as those that UAs can verify,
a UA receiving a multicast notification is in a position to verify
the notification. It does so by selecting the authentication block
or blocks that it can verify. If authentication fails, either due
to lack of an authentication block, or lack of the proper SPI, the
UA simply discards the notification. In a network without DAs,
the SPIs of the UA and SA must also match.
13. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Charles Perkins, of Nokia, and
Erik Guttman and Jonathan Wood, of Sun Microsystems, for their
stimulating discussion and suggestions during the initial phases
of the subscription/notification design. We would also like to
thank Erik for his intense scrutiny of the specification during
the later phases. His comments were instrumental in refining the
design. Shivaun Albright, of HP, motivated simplification of the
protocol to focus on initial registration and deregistration only.
Vaishali Mithbaokar implemented the simplified protocol.
14. References
[1] E. Guttman, C. Perkins, J. Veizades, and M. Day.
Service Location Protocol.
RFC 2608, July 1999.
[2] S. Bradner.
Key Words for Use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels.
RFC 2119, March 1997.
[3] E. Guttman, C. Perkins, J. Kempf
Service Templates and service: Schemes.
RFC 2609, July 1999.
[4] D. Meyer.
Administratively Scoped IP Multicast.
RFC 2365, July 1998.
[5] D. Crocker and P. Overell.
Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF.
RFC 2234, November 1997.
[6] Hanna, S., B. Patel, M. Shah
Multicast Address Dynamic Client Allocation Protocol (MADCAP).
draft-ietf-malloc-madcap-XX.txt, A work in progress.
[7] http://www.iana.org/in-notes/iana/assignments/multicast-addresses
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 12]
INTERNET DRAFT September 2000
15. Full Copyright Statement}
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1997). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and
distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind,
provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE."
16. Author's Addresses
James Kempf Jason Goldschmidt
Sun Microsystems C0318 Bucknell University
UMPK15-214 Lewisburg, PA, 17837
901 San Antonio Rd. USA
Palo Alto, CA 94040
USA
Phone: +1 650 786 5890 +1 570 577 5624
Email: james.kempf@sun.com jgoldsch@acm.org
Kempf, Goldschmidt expires March 2001 [Page 13]