218 lines
9.8 KiB
Perl
218 lines
9.8 KiB
Perl
.\" $NetBSD: a.t,v 1.3 2003/08/07 10:30:55 agc Exp $
|
|
.\"
|
|
.\" Copyright (c) 1983, 1986, 1993
|
|
.\" The Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved.
|
|
.\"
|
|
.\" Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
|
|
.\" modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
|
|
.\" are met:
|
|
.\" 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
|
|
.\" notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
|
|
.\" 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
|
|
.\" notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
|
|
.\" documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
|
|
.\" 3. Neither the name of the University nor the names of its contributors
|
|
.\" may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software
|
|
.\" without specific prior written permission.
|
|
.\"
|
|
.\" THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE REGENTS AND CONTRIBUTORS ``AS IS'' AND
|
|
.\" ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE
|
|
.\" IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE
|
|
.\" ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE REGENTS OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE
|
|
.\" FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL
|
|
.\" DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS
|
|
.\" OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION)
|
|
.\" HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT
|
|
.\" LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY
|
|
.\" OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
|
|
.\" SUCH DAMAGE.
|
|
.\"
|
|
.\" @(#)a.t 8.1 (Berkeley) 6/8/93
|
|
.\"
|
|
.nr H2 1
|
|
.\".ds RH "Gateways and routing
|
|
.br
|
|
.ne 2i
|
|
.NH
|
|
\s+2Gateways and routing issues\s0
|
|
.PP
|
|
The system has been designed with the expectation that it will
|
|
be used in an internetwork environment. The ``canonical''
|
|
environment was envisioned to be a collection of local area
|
|
networks connected at one or more points through hosts with
|
|
multiple network interfaces (one on each local area network),
|
|
and possibly a connection to a long haul network (for example,
|
|
the ARPANET). In such an environment, issues of
|
|
gatewaying and packet routing become very important. Certain
|
|
of these issues, such as congestion
|
|
control, have been handled in a simplistic manner or specifically
|
|
not addressed.
|
|
Instead, where possible, the network system
|
|
attempts to provide simple mechanisms upon which more involved
|
|
policies may be implemented. As some of these problems become
|
|
better understood, the solutions developed will be incorporated
|
|
into the system.
|
|
.PP
|
|
This section will describe the facilities provided for packet
|
|
routing. The simplistic mechanisms provided for congestion
|
|
control are described in chapter 12.
|
|
.NH 2
|
|
Routing tables
|
|
.PP
|
|
The network system maintains a set of routing tables for
|
|
selecting a network interface to use in delivering a
|
|
packet to its destination. These tables are of the form:
|
|
.DS
|
|
.ta \w'struct 'u +\w'u_long 'u +\w'sockaddr rt_gateway; 'u
|
|
struct rtentry {
|
|
u_long rt_hash; /* hash key for lookups */
|
|
struct sockaddr rt_dst; /* destination net or host */
|
|
struct sockaddr rt_gateway; /* forwarding agent */
|
|
short rt_flags; /* see below */
|
|
short rt_refcnt; /* no. of references to structure */
|
|
u_long rt_use; /* packets sent using route */
|
|
struct ifnet *rt_ifp; /* interface to give packet to */
|
|
};
|
|
.DE
|
|
.PP
|
|
The routing information is organized in two separate tables, one
|
|
for routes to a host and one for routes to a network. The
|
|
distinction between hosts and networks is necessary so
|
|
that a single mechanism may be used
|
|
for both broadcast and multi-drop type networks, and
|
|
also for networks built from point-to-point links (e.g
|
|
DECnet [DEC80]).
|
|
.PP
|
|
Each table is organized as a hashed set of linked lists.
|
|
Two 32-bit hash values are calculated by routines defined for
|
|
each address family; one based on the destination being
|
|
a host, and one assuming the target is the network portion
|
|
of the address. Each hash value is used to
|
|
locate a hash chain to search (by taking the value modulo the
|
|
hash table size) and the entire 32-bit value is then
|
|
used as a key in scanning the list of routes. Lookups are
|
|
applied first to the routing
|
|
table for hosts, then to the routing table for networks.
|
|
If both lookups fail, a final lookup is made for a ``wildcard''
|
|
route (by convention, network 0).
|
|
The first appropriate route discovered is used.
|
|
By doing this, routes to a specific host on a network may be
|
|
present as well as routes to the network. This also allows a
|
|
``fall back'' network route to be defined to a ``smart'' gateway
|
|
which may then perform more intelligent routing.
|
|
.PP
|
|
Each routing table entry contains a destination (the desired final destination),
|
|
a gateway to which to send the packet,
|
|
and various flags which indicate the route's status and type (host or
|
|
network). A count
|
|
of the number of packets sent using the route is kept, along
|
|
with a count of ``held references'' to the dynamically
|
|
allocated structure to insure that memory reclamation
|
|
occurs only when the route is not in use. Finally, a pointer to the
|
|
a network interface is kept; packets sent using
|
|
the route should be handed to this interface.
|
|
.PP
|
|
Routes are typed in two ways: either as host or network, and as
|
|
``direct'' or ``indirect''. The host/network
|
|
distinction determines how to compare the \fIrt_dst\fP field
|
|
during lookup. If the route is to a network, only a packet's
|
|
destination network is compared to the \fIrt_dst\fP entry stored
|
|
in the table. If the route is to a host, the addresses must
|
|
match bit for bit.
|
|
.PP
|
|
The distinction between ``direct'' and ``indirect'' routes indicates
|
|
whether the destination is directly connected to the source.
|
|
This is needed when performing local network encapsulation. If
|
|
a packet is destined for a peer at a host or network which is
|
|
not directly connected to the source, the internetwork packet
|
|
header will
|
|
contain the address of the eventual destination, while
|
|
the local network header will address the intervening
|
|
gateway. Should the destination be directly connected, these addresses
|
|
are likely to be identical, or a mapping between the two exists.
|
|
The RTF_GATEWAY flag indicates that the route is to an ``indirect''
|
|
gateway agent, and that the local network header should be filled in
|
|
from the \fIrt_gateway\fP field instead of
|
|
from the final internetwork destination address.
|
|
.PP
|
|
It is assumed that multiple routes to the same destination will not
|
|
be present; only one of multiple routes, that most recently installed,
|
|
will be used.
|
|
.PP
|
|
Routing redirect control messages are used to dynamically
|
|
modify existing routing table entries as well as dynamically
|
|
create new routing table entries. On hosts where exhaustive
|
|
routing information is too expensive to maintain (e.g. work
|
|
stations), the
|
|
combination of wildcard routing entries and routing redirect
|
|
messages can be used to provide a simple routing management
|
|
scheme without the use of a higher level policy process.
|
|
Current connections may be rerouted after notification of the protocols
|
|
by means of their \fIpr_ctlinput\fP entries.
|
|
Statistics are kept by the routing table routines
|
|
on the use of routing redirect messages and their
|
|
affect on the routing tables. These statistics may be viewed using
|
|
.IR netstat (1).
|
|
.PP
|
|
Status information other than routing redirect control messages
|
|
may be used in the future, but at present they are ignored.
|
|
Likewise, more intelligent ``metrics'' may be used to describe
|
|
routes in the future, possibly based on bandwidth and monetary
|
|
costs.
|
|
.NH 2
|
|
Routing table interface
|
|
.PP
|
|
A protocol accesses the routing tables through
|
|
three routines,
|
|
one to allocate a route, one to free a route, and one
|
|
to process a routing redirect control message.
|
|
The routine \fIrtalloc\fP performs route allocation; it is
|
|
called with a pointer to the following structure containing
|
|
the desired destination:
|
|
.DS
|
|
._f
|
|
struct route {
|
|
struct rtentry *ro_rt;
|
|
struct sockaddr ro_dst;
|
|
};
|
|
.DE
|
|
The route returned is assumed ``held'' by the caller until
|
|
released with an \fIrtfree\fP call. Protocols which implement
|
|
virtual circuits, such as TCP, hold onto routes for the duration
|
|
of the circuit's lifetime, while connection-less protocols,
|
|
such as UDP, allocate and free routes whenever their destination address
|
|
changes.
|
|
.PP
|
|
The routine \fIrtredirect\fP is called to process a routing redirect
|
|
control message. It is called with a destination address,
|
|
the new gateway to that destination, and the source of the redirect.
|
|
Redirects are accepted only from the current router for the destination.
|
|
If a non-wildcard route
|
|
exists to the destination, the gateway entry in the route is modified
|
|
to point at the new gateway supplied. Otherwise, a new routing
|
|
table entry is inserted reflecting the information supplied. Routes
|
|
to interfaces and routes to gateways which are not directly accessible
|
|
from the host are ignored.
|
|
.NH 2
|
|
User level routing policies
|
|
.PP
|
|
Routing policies implemented in user processes manipulate the
|
|
kernel routing tables through two \fIioctl\fP calls. The
|
|
commands SIOCADDRT and SIOCDELRT add and delete routing entries,
|
|
respectively; the tables are read through the /dev/kmem device.
|
|
The decision to place policy decisions in a user process implies
|
|
that routing table updates may lag a bit behind the identification of
|
|
new routes, or the failure of existing routes, but this period
|
|
of instability is normally very small with proper implementation
|
|
of the routing process. Advisory information, such as ICMP
|
|
error messages and IMP diagnostic messages, may be read from
|
|
raw sockets (described in the next section).
|
|
.PP
|
|
Several routing policy processes have already been implemented. The
|
|
system standard
|
|
``routing daemon'' uses a variant of the Xerox NS Routing Information
|
|
Protocol [Xerox82] to maintain up-to-date routing tables in our local
|
|
environment. Interaction with other existing routing protocols,
|
|
such as the Internet EGP (Exterior Gateway Protocol), has been
|
|
accomplished using a similar process.
|