Internet Draft                       Jamal Hadi Salim
                                     Znyx Networks
                                     Hormuzd Khosravi
                                     Intel
                                     July 2001


                   Netlink as an IP services protocol
                   draft-salim-netlink-jhshk-00.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
      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.''

      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.


Conventions used in this document


        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].



1.  Abstract


        This document describes Linux Netlink, which is used in Linux
        both as an inter-kernel messaging system as well as between ker-
        nel and user-space.



draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                     ^L[Page 1]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


        The focus of this document is to describe netlink from a context
        of a protocol between a Forwording Engine Component (FEC) and a
        Control Plane Component(CPC) that define an IP service.

        The document ignores the ability of netlink as a inter-kernel
        messaging system, as a an inter-process communication scheme (IPC)
        or its use in configuring other non-network as well as network but
        non-IP services (such as decnet etc).




2. Introduction


     The concept of IP Service control-forwarding separation was first
     introduced in the early 1990s by the BSD 4.4 routing sockets.
     [BSD route sockets].  The focus at that time was a simple IP(v4)
     forwarding service and how the CPC, either via a command line con-
     figuration tool or a dynamic route daemon, can control forwarding
     tables for that IPV4 forwarding service.

     The IP world has evolved considerably since those days. Linux
     netlink, when observed from a service provisioning point of view
     takes routing sockets one step further by breaking the barrier of
     focus around IPV4 forwarding.  Since the 2.1 kernel, netlink has
     been providing the IP service abstraction to a few services other
     than the classical IPv4 forwarding.

     We first give some concept definitions and then describe how
     netlink fits in.


2.1. Some definitions


     A Control plane(CP) is an execution environment that may have sev-
     eral components which we refer to as CPCs. Each CPC provides con-
     trol for a different IP service being executed by a FE component.
     This means that there might be several CPCs on a physical CP if it
     is controlling several IP services.  In essence, the cohesion
     between a CP component and a FE component is the service abstrac-
     tion.







draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                     ^L[Page 2]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


     In the diagram below we show a simple FE<->CP setup to provide an
     example of the classical IPv4 service with an extension to do some
     basic QoS egress scheduling and how it fits in this described
     model.


                               Control Plane (CP)
                              .------------------------------------
                              |    /^^^^^       /^^^^^            |
                              |   |       |     | COPS  |-        |
                              |   | ospfd |     |  PEP  |         |
                              |          /      _____/   |        |
                            /------_____/           |    |        |
                            | |        |             |   |        |
                            | |_____________________|___|_________|
                            |           |            |   |
                           ******************************************
             Forwarding    ************* Netlink  layer ************
             Engine (FE)   *****************************************
              .-------------|-----------|------------|---|-----------
              |       IPv4 forwading    |               /            |
              |       FE Service       /               /             |
              |       Component       /               /              |
              |       ---------------/---------------/---------      |
              |       |             |               /         |      |
       packet |       |     --------|--        ----|-----     |      | packet
       in     |       |     |  IPV4    |      | Egress   |    |      | out
       -->--->|------>|---->|Forwading |----->| QoS      |--->| ---->|---->
              |       |     |          |      | Scheduler|    |      |
              |       |     -----------        ----------     |      |
              |       |                                       |      |
              |        ---------------------------------------       |
              |                                                      |
              -------------------------------------------------------


2.1.1. Control Plane Components (CPCs)


     Control plane components would encompass signalling protocols with
     diversity ranging from dynamic routing protocols such as OSPF
     [RFC2328] to tag distribution protocols such as CR-LDP [RFC3036].
     Classical Management protocols and activities also fall under this
     category. These include SNMP [RFC1157], COPS [RFC2748] or propri-
     etary CLI/GUI configuration mechanisms.







draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                     ^L[Page 3]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


     The purpose of the control plane is to provide an execution envi-
     ronment for the above mentioned activities with the ultimate goal
     being to configure and manage the second NE component: the FE.  The
     result of the configuration would define the way packets travesing
     the FE are treated.

     The CP components are traditionaly run in software since they tend
     to be very rich in syntax and are moving targets requiring ease of
     modification.

     In the above diagram, ospfd and COPS are distinct CPCs.




2.1.2. Forwarding Engine Components


     The FE is the entity of the NE that incoming packets (from the net-
     work into the NE) first encounter.

     The FE's service specific component massages the packet to provide
     it with a treatment to achieve a IP service as defined by the con-
     trol plane components for that IP service.  Different services will
     utilize different FEC. Service modules maybe chained to achieve a
     more complex service (as shown in the diagram).  When built for
     providing a specific service, the FE service component will adhere
     to a Forwading Model.

     In the above diagram, the IPV4 FE component includes both the IPV4
     Forwarding service module as well as the Egress Scheduling service
     module.  Another service might may add a policy forwarder between
     the IPV4 forwader and the QoS egress Scheduler.  A simpler classi-
     cal service would have constituted only the IPV4 forwarder.


2.1.3. IP Services


     An IP Service is the treatment of an IP packet within the NE.  This
     treatment is provided by a combination of both the CPC and FEC

     The time span of the service is from the moment when the packet
     arrives at the NE to the moment it departs. In essence an IP ser-
     vice in this context is a Per-Hop Behavior.  A service control/sig-
     naling protocol/management-application (CP components running on
     NEs defining the end to end path) unifies the end to end view of
     the IP service. As noted above, these CP components then define the




draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                     ^L[Page 4]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


     behavior of the FE (and therefore the NE) to a described packet.

     A simple example of an IP service is the classical IPv4 Forwading.
     In this case, control components such as routing protocols(OSPF,
     RIP etc) and proprietary CLI/GUI configurations modify the FE's
     forwarding tables in order to offer the simple service of forward-
     ing packets to the next hop.  Traditionally, NEs offering this sim-
     ple service are known as routers.

     Over the years it has become important to add aditional services to
     the routers to meet emerging requirements.  More complex services
     extending classical forwarding were added and standardized.  These
     newer services might go beyond the layer 3 contents of the packet
     header. However, the name "router", although a misnomer, is still
     used to describe these NEs.  Services (which may look beyond the
     classical L3 headers) here include firewalling, Qos in Diffserv and
     RSVP, NATs, policy based routing etc.  Newer control protocols or
     management activities are introduced with these new services.

     One extreme definition of a IP service is something a service
     provider would be able to charge for.



3.  Netlink Architecture


     IP services components control is defined by using templates.

     The FEC and CPC participate to deliver the IP service by communi-
     cating using these templates.  The FEC might continously get
     updates from the control plane component on how to operate the ser-
     vice (example for V4 forwarding route additions or deletions).

     The interaction between the FEC and the CPC, in the netlink con-
     text, would define a protocol.  Netlink provides the mechanism for
     the CPC(residing in user space) and FEC(residing in kernel space)
     to define their own protocol definition.  The FEC and CPC, using
     netlink mechanisms, may choose to define a reliable protocol
     between each other, for example.  By default netlink provides an
     unreliable communication.

     Note that the FEC and CPC can both live in the same memory protec-
     tion domain and use the connect() system call to create a path to
     the peer and talk to each other. We will not discuss this further
     other than to say it is available as a mechanism.  Through out this
     document we will refer interchangbly to the FEC to mean kernel-
     space and the CPC to mean user-space.





draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                     ^L[Page 5]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt

     Note: Netlink allows participation in IP services by both service
     components.

3.1. The message format


     There are three levels to a netlink message: The general netlink
     message header, the IP service specific template, the IP service
     specific data.


   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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                   Netlink message header                      |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                  IP Service Template                          |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   |                  IP Service specific data in TLVs             |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



3.2. Protocol Model


     This section expands on how netlink provides the mechanism for ser-
     vice oriented FEC and CPC interaction.

3.2.1.  Service Addressing


     Access is provided by first connecting to the service on the FE.
     This is done by making a socket() system call to the PF_NETLINK
     domain.  Each FEC is identified by a protocol number. One may open
     either SOCK_RAW or SOCK_DGRAM type sockets although netlink doesnt
     distinguish the two.  The socket connection provides the basis for
     the FE<->CP addressing.

     Connecting to a service is followed (at any point during the life
     of the connection) by issuing either a service specific command
     mostly for configuration purposes (from the CPC to the FEC) or sub-
     scribing/unsubscribing to service(s') events.



draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                     ^L[Page 6]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


3.2.1.1.  Sample Service Hierachy

     In the diagram below we show a simple IP service, foo, and the
     interaction it has between CP and FE components for the service.


[--------------------------------------------------------.
|   .-----.                                              |
|  |       \                 . -------.                  |
|  |  CLI   |               /          \                 |
|  |        |              | CP protocol\                |
|   \      /->> -.         |  component  | <-.           |
|    \__ _/      |         |   For       |   |           |
|                |         | IP service  |   ^           |
|                Y         |    foo      |   |           |
|                |          \___________/    ^           |
|                Y   1,4,6,8,9 /  ^ 2,5,10   | 3,7       |
 --------------- Y------------/---|----------|-----------
                 |           ^    |          ^
               **|***********|****|**********|**********
               ************* Netlink  layer ************
               **|***********|****|**********|**********
       FE        |           |    ^          ^
       .-------- Y-----------Y----|--------- |----.
       |         \           |              /     |
       |          \          Y            /       |
       |          .\ --------^-------.  /         |
       |          |FE component/module|/          |
       |          |  for IP Service   |           |
--->---|------>---|     foo           |----->-----|------>--
       |           -------------------            |
       |                                          |
       |                                          |
        ------------------------------------------


     The control plane protocol for IP service foo does the following to
     connect to its FE counterpart.  The steps below are also numbered
     above in the diagram.


1)   Connect to IP service foo through a socket connect. A typical con-
     nection would be via a call to: socket(AF_NETLINK, SOCK_RAW,
     NETLINK_FOO)

2)   Bind to listen to specific async events for service foo





draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                     ^L[Page 7]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


3)   Bind to listen to specific async FE events


3.2.2. Netlink message header

     Netlink messages consist of a byte stream with one or multiple
     Netlink headers and associated payload. (For multipart messages the
     first and all following headers have the NLM_F_MULTI netlink header
      flag set, except for the last header which has the netlink header
     type NLMSG_DONE.)

     The netlink message header is shown below.


   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
                   0             1              2             3
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                          Length                             |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |            Type              |           Flags              |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                      Sequence Number                        |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Process PID                          |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


   The fields in the header are:





















draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                     ^L[Page 8]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt

          Length: 32 bits
          The length of the message in bytes including the header.

          Type: 16 bits
          This field describes the message content.
          It can be one of the standard message types:
               NLMSG_NOOP  message is ignored in the current implementation
               NLMSG_ERROR the message signals an error and the payload
                        contains a nlmsgerr structure. This can be looked
                              at as a NACK and typically it is from FEC to CPC.
               NLMSG_DONE message terminates a multipart message

          Individual IP Services specify more message types, for e.g.,
          NETLINK_ROUTE Service specifies several types such as RTM_NEWLINK,
          RTM_DELLINK, RTM_GETLINK, RTM_NEWADDR, RTM_DELADDR, RTM_NEWROUTE,
          RTM_DELROUTE, etc.

          Flags: 16 bits
          The standard flag bits used in netlink are
                 NLM_F_REQUEST   Must be set on all request messages (typically
                                 from user space to kernel space)
                 NLM_F_MULTI     Indicates the message is part of a multipart
                                 message terminated by NLMSG_DONE
                 NLM_F_ACK       Request for an acknowledgment on success.
                                 Typical direction of request is from user
                                 space to kernel space.
                 NLM_F_ECHO      Echo this request. Typical direction of
                                 request is from user space to kernel space.

          Additional flag bits for GET requests on config information in the FEC
                 NLM_F_ROOT     Return the complete table instead of a single
                                entry.
                 NLM_F_MATCH    Return all matching criteria passed in message
                                content.
                 NLM_F_ATOMIC   Return an atomic snapshot of the table being
                                referenced.
                 NLM_F_DUMP     Return all that matches in the table. This is
                                a shortcut having both NLM_F_ROOT and
                                NLM_F_MATCH flags set.

          Additional flag bits for NEW requests
                 NLM_F_REPLACE   Replace existing matching config object with
                                 this request.
                 NLM_F_EXCL      Don't replace the config object if it already
                                 exists.
                 NLM_F_CREATE    Create config object if it doesn't already
                                 exist.
                 NLM_F_APPEND    Add to the end of the object list.



draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                     ^L[Page 9]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt

     For those familiar with BSDish use of such operations in route
     sockets, the equivalent translations are:

     BSD ADD operation equates to NLM_F_CREATE or-ed with NLM_F_EXCL

     BSD CHANGE operation equates to NLM_F_REPLACE

     BSD Check operation equates to NLM_F_EXCL

     BSD APPEND equaivalent is actually mapped to NLM_F_CREATE


          Sequence Number: 32 bits
          The sequence number of the message.

          Process PID: 32 bits
          The PID of the process sending the message. The PID is used by the
          kernel to multiplex to the correct sockets. A PID of zero is used
          when sending messages from user space to the kernel.


3.2.2.1. Mechanisms for creating protocols

     One could create a reliable protocol between an FEC and a CPC by
     using the combination of sequence numbers, ACKs and retransmit
     timers.  Both sequence numbers and sequence numbers are provided by
     netlink.  Timers are provided by Linux.

     One could create a heartbeat protocol between the FEC and CPC by
     using the ECHO flags.

3.2.2.2. The ACK netlink message


     This message is actually used to denote both an ACK and a NACK.
     Typically the direction is from kernel to user space (in response
     to an ACK request message that is sent). However, user space should
     be able to send ACKs back to kernel space when requested. This is
     IP service specific.















draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                    ^L[Page 10]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


     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
                     0             1              2             3
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                       Netlink message header                |
      |                       type = NLMSG_ERROR                    |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                          error code                         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                       OLD Netlink message header            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



     Error code: integer (typically 32 bits)

     Error code of zero indicates that the message is an ACK response.
     An ACK response message contains the original netlink message
     header that can be used to compare against (sent sequence numbers
     etc).

     A non-zero error message is equivalent to a Negative ACK (NACK).
     In such a situation, the netlink data that was sent down to the
     kernel is returned appended to the original netlink message header.
     An error code printable via the perror() is also set (not in the
     message header, rather in the executing environment state vari-
     able).

3.2.3.  FE services' templates


     These are services that are offered by the system for general use
     by other services. They include ability to configure and listen to
     changes in resource management.  IP address management, link events
     etc fit here.  We separate them into this section here for logical
     purposes despite the fact that they are accessed via the
     NETLINK_ROUTE FEC. The reason that they exist within NETLINK_ROUTE
     is due to historical cruft based on the fact that BSD 4.4 rather
     narrowly focussed Route Sockets implemented them as part of the
     IPV4 forwarding sockets.



3.2.3.1.  Network Interface Service Module





draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                    ^L[Page 11]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


     This service provides the ability to create, remove or get informa-
     tion about a specific network interface.  The Interface service
     message template is shown below.

     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
                     0             1              2             3
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |   Family    |   Padding    |          Device Type           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                     Interface Index                         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                      Device Flags                           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                      Change Mask                            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


     Descriptions of the headers to be added.



3.2.3.2.  IP Address Service module

This service provides the ability to add, remove or receive information
about an IP address associated with an interface. The Address provi-
sioning service message template is shown below.

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
                0             1              2             3
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |   Family    |     Length    |     Flags     |    Scope      |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |                     Interface Index                         |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


     Descriptions of the headers to be added.



4.  Sample Protocol for The foo IP service


     Our proverbial IP service "foo" is used again to demonstrate how
     one can deploy a simple IP service control using netlink.




draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                    ^L[Page 12]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


     These steps are continued from the "Sample Service Hierachy" sec-
     tion.

4)   query for current config of FE component

5)   receive response to 4) via channel on 3)

6)   query for current state of IP service foo

7)   receive response to 6) via channel on 2)

9)   register the protocol specific packets you would like the FE to
     forward to you

10)  send specific service foo commands and receive responses for them
     if needed


4.1.  Interacting with other IP services


     The last diagram shows another control component configuring the
     same service. In this case, it is a proprietary Command Line Inter-
     face.  The CLI (may or ) may not be using the netlink protocol to
     communicate to the foo component.  If the CLI should issue commands
     that will affect the policy of the FEC for service "foo" then, then
     the "foo" CPC is notified. It could then make algorithmic decisions
     based on this input (example if a policy that foo installed was
     deleted, there might be need to propagate this to all the peers of
     service "foo").


5.  Currently Defined netlink IP services


     Although there are many other IP services defined which are using
     netlink, we will only mention those integrated into the kernel
     today (kernel version 2.4.6). These are:


          NETLINK_ROUTE,NETLINK_FIREWALL,NETLINK_ARPD,NETLINK_ROUTE6,
          NETLINK_IP6_FW NETLINK_TAPBASE,NETLINK_SKIP,NETLINK_USERSOCK.








draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                    ^L[Page 13]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


5.1.  IP Service NETLINK_ROUTE


     This service allows CPCs to modify the IPv4 routing table in the
     Forwarding Engine. It can also be used by CPCs to receive routing
     updates.
     It contains several modules described below.





5.1.1. Network Route Service Module

This service provides the ability to create, remove or receive
information about a network route.
The service message template is shown below.



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
                0             1              2             3
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |   Family    |  Src length   |  Dest length  |     TOS       |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |  Table ID   |   Protocol    |     Scope     |     Type      |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |                          Flags                              |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

     Descriptions of the headers to be added.



5.1.2.  Neighbour Setup Service Module

     This service provides the ability to add, remove or receive infor-
     mation about a neighbour table entry (e.g. an ARP entry).  The ser-
     vice message template is shown below.











draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                    ^L[Page 14]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


     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
                     0             1              2             3
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |   Family    |    Padding    |           Padding             |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                     Interface Index                         |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |           State             |     Flags     |     Type      |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


Descriptions of the headers to be added.

5.1.3.  Traffic Control Service

This service provides the ability to add, remove or get a
queueing discipline.
The service message template is shown below.



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
                0             1              2             3
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |   Family    |    Padding    |           Padding             |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |                     Interface Index                         |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |                      Qdisc handle                           |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |                     Parent Qdisc                            |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
 |                        TCM Info                             |
 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


     Descriptions of the headers to be added.

5.2. IP Service NETLINK_FIREWALL



     This service allows CPCs to receive packets sent by the IPv4 fire-
     wall module in the FE.







draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                    ^L[Page 15]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


5.3. IP Service NETLINK_ARPD



     This service is used by CPCs for managing the ARP table in FE.



5.4. IP Service NETLINK_ROUTE6



     This service allows CPCs to modify the IPv6 routing table in the
     FE.  It can also be used by CPCs to receive routing updates.



5.5.  IP Service NETLINK_IP6_FW



     This service allows CPCs to receive packets that failed the IPv6
     firewall checks by that module in the FE.



5.6. IP Service NETLINK_TAPBASE



     This service allows CPCs (user space) to simulate an ethernet driver
     belonging to the FE.
     This is useful for running stacks in user space (typical uses are
     for creating tunnels or even simulated networks)




5.7. IP Service NETLINK_SKIP



     This service is reserved for ENskip (?).







draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                    ^L[Page 16]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


5.8.  IP Service NETLINK_USERSOCK



     This service is reserved for future Control Plane to FE protocols.



6.  Security Considerations


     Netlink lives in a trusted environment of a single host separated
     by kernel and user space. Linux capabilities ensures that only
     someone with CAP_NET_ADMIN capability (typically root user) is
     allowed to open sockets.


7. References



        [RFC1633]  R. Braden, D. Clark, and S. Shenker, "Integrated
     Services in the Internet Architecture: an Overview", RFC 1633,
     ISI, MIT, and PARC, June 1994.


        [RFC1812]  F. Baker, "Requirements for IP Version 4
     Routers", RFC 1812, June 1995.



        [RFC2475]  M. Carlson, W. Weiss, S. Blake, Z. Wang, D.
     Black, and E.  Davies, "An Architecture for Differentiated
     Services", RFC 2475, December 1998.


        [RFC2748] J. Boyle, R. Cohen, D. Durham, S. Herzog, R.
     Rajan, A. Sastry, "The COPS (Common Open Policy Service) Pro-
     tocol", RFC 2748, January 2000.


        [RFC2328] J. Moy, "OSPF Version 2", RFC 2328, April 1998.


        [RFC1157] J.D. Case, M. Fedor, M.L. Schoffstall, C. Davin,
     "Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)", RFC 1157, May
     1990.




draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                    ^L[Page 17]


jhs_hk                                       draft_forces_netlink_00.txt


        [RFC3036] L. Andersson, P. Doolan, N. Feldman, A. Fredette,
     B. Thomas "LDP Specification", RFC 3036, January 2001.

        [BSD route sockets] G.R. Wright, W. Richard Stevens.
     "TCP/IP Illustrated volume 2, chapter 20", June 1995


8. Acknowledgements


1)   Andi Kleen for man pages on netlink and rtnetlink.

2)   Alexey Kuznetsov is credited for extending netlink to the IP ser-
     vice delivery model. The original netlink character device was
     written by Alan Cox.


9. Author's Address:

   Jamal Hadi Salim
   Znyx Networks
   Ottawa, Ontario
   Canada
   hadi@znyx.com

   Hormuzd M Khosravi
   Intel
   2111N.E. 25th Avenue JF3-206
   Hillsboro OR 97124-5961
   1 503 264 0334
   hormuzd.m.khosravi@intel.com




















draft_forces_netlink_00.txt                                    ^L[Page 18]