TCP/IP Illustrated, Volume 1 CCIE Professional Development - Routing TCP-IP , Volume unpauvagari.ml TCP IP Illustrated Volume unpauvagari.ml - unpauvagari.ml Expert and the first of two volumes that focuses on TCP/IP routing issues. Early in b. Cisco Press - Routing TCP IP Volume 1 2nd Edition Oct - event. Routing TCP/IP, Volume I, Jeff Doyle does a fantastic job of building the TCP/IP .  As will be seen later, creating a data link layer frame is really more like.
|Language:||English, Spanish, Japanese|
|Genre:||Health & Fitness|
|Distribution:||Free* [*Register to download]|
Answers to Chapter 1 Configuration Exercises . Since the publication of Volume I of Routing TCP/IP, many volumes have been added to the. Jeff Doyle is the author of Routing TCP/IP, Volume 1 ( avg rating, ratings, 7 reviews, published ), Routing Tcp/Ip, Volume II ( avg ratin. Routing TCP/IP tackles this black art comprehensively. The present Volume 1 covers all the needed fun- damentals of TCP/IP networks and gives you all the.
From a communications perspective these tools operate largely in the same fashion as their real-world counterparts do, except that there may not be wires or other physical communication channels, and that connections can be made in the desired fashion. In general, there is no reason for protocols to change just because a function or a connection exists on a virtual platform.
However, sometimes there are useful underlying technologies that facilitiate connection to virtualized systems, or optimised or additional tools that are needed in the the virtualized environment.
For instance, many underlying technologies enable virtualization at hardware or physical networking level. These techniques allow users and traffic to be put on specific networks, which in turn may comprise of virtual components. Expires September 6, [Page 4] Internet-Draft Network Virtualization March Other examples of protocols providing helpful techniques include virtual private networking mechanisms or management mechanisms and data models that can assist in setting up and administering virtualized systems.
There may also be situations where scaling demands changes in protocols. An ability to replicate many instances may push the limits of protocol mechanisms that were designed primarily or originally for physical networks. Selection vs. Creation and Orchestration Two primary tasks in virtualization should be differentiated: selection of a particular virtual instance, and the tasks related to how that virtual instance was created and continues to be managed.
Selection involves choosing a particular virtual instance, or an entrypoint to a virtual network. In its simplest form, a customer could be hardwired by configuration to a particular virtual instance. In more complex cases, the connecting devices may have some settings that affect the choice.
In the general case, both the connecting devices and the network they are connecting to it have a say in the choice. The selection choice may even be dynamic in some cases. For instance, traffic pattern analysis may affect the selection. Typically, however, connecting devices do not have a say in what the virtual instance does. This is directed by the network operator and its customers.
An instance is specified, created, and needs to be continously managed and orchestrated. The creation can be manual and occur rarely, or be more dynamic, e. Protocols vs. Representations of Virtual Networks Some of virtualization technology benefits from protocol support either in the data or control plane.
But there are also management constructs, such as data models representing virtual services or networks and data models useful in the construction of such services.
There are also conceptual definitions that may be needed when constructing either protocols or data models or when discussing service agreements between providers and consumers. Virtualization in 5G Networks Goals for the support of virtualization in 5G relate to both the use of virtualized network functions to build the 5G network, and to enabling the separation of different user or traffic classes into separate network constructs called slices.
Slices enable a separation of concerns, allow the creation of dedicated services for special traffic types, allow faster evolution of the network mechanisms by easing gradual migration to new functionality, and enable faster time to market for new new functionality. In 5G, slice selection happens as a combination of settings in the User Equipment UE and the network.
This information is combined with the information configured in the network for a given subscriber and the policies of the networks involved.
Ultimately, a slice is selected. This function collects information provided by the UE and the subscriber database from home network, and consults the Network Slice Selection Function NSSF to make a decision of the slice selected for the user.
When the selection has been made, this may also mean that the connection is moved to a different AMF; enabling separate networks to have entirely different network-level service. The creation and orchestration of slices does not happen at this signalling plane, but rather the slices are separately specified, created, and managed, typically with the help of an orchestrator function. The exact mechanisms for doing this continue to evolve, but in any case involve multiple layers of technology, ranging from underlying virtualization software to network component configuration mechanisms and models often in YANG to higher abstraction level descriptions often in TOSCA , to orchestrator software.
There are some exceptions, though, such as when the need to virtualize has caused previously held assumptions to break, and the Internet community has had to provide new solutions. For instance, early versions of the HTTP protocol assumed a single host served a single website. But where virtualization affects the Internet architecture and implementations is at lower layers, the physical and MAC layers, the systems that deal with the delivery of IP packets to the right destination, management frameworks controlling these systems, and data models designed to help the creation, monitoring, or management of virtualized services.
What follows is an overview of existing technologies and technologies currently under development that support virtualization in its various forms.
Selection of Virtual Instances Some L2 technology allows the identification of traffic belonging to a particular virtual network or connection. For providing virtualized services, however, provider-based solutions are often the most relevant ones. L1VPN facilitates virtualization of the underlying L0 "physical" medium.
The technologies choices available can be described along two axes, control mechanisms and dataplane encapsulation mechanisms. The two are not compeltely orthogonal. In the data plane, for provider based VPNs, the first important observation is that the most obvious encapsulation is NOT used. While IPSec could be used for provider-based VPNs, it does not appear to be used in practice, and is not the focus for any of the available control mechanisms.
This is particularly common for VPNs within one operator, and is sometimes supported across operators. Keyed GRE can be used, particularly for cross-operator cases. However, it seems to be rare in practice.
Using TE might result in a deeper label stack. These mechanism do augment the data plane capabilites with control words that support additional features. In operation, LDP is used to signal the communicating end-points that are interested in communicating with each other in support of specific VPNs.
Information about the MAC addresses used behind the provider edges is exchanged using classic Ethernet flooding technology. It has been proposed to use BGP to bootstrap the exchang eof information as to who the communicating endpoints are. This technolgoy combination is generally known as L3VPN. This is known as EVPN. The BGP exchanges are used to carry the MAC address reachability behind each provider edge router, providing an Ethernet multipoint service without a need to flood unkown- destination Ethernet packets.
That is not widely practiced. Traffic Engineering and QoS Traffic Engineering TE is the term used to refer to techniques that enable operators to control how specific traffic flows are treated within their networks. A good example of work that is currently considered in the TEAS WG is the set of models that detail earlier IETF-developed topology models with both traffic engineering information and connection to what Arkko, et al.
These models enable reasoning about the state of the network with respect to those services, and to set up services with optimal network connectivity. Traffic engineering is a common requirement for many routing systems, and also discussed, e. Service Chaining The SFC working group has defined the concept of Service Chaining: Today, common deployment models have service functions inserted on the data-forwarding path between communicating peers.
Going forward, however, there is a need to move to a different model, where service functions, whether physical or virtualized, are not required to reside on the direct data path and traffic is instead steered through required service functions, wherever they are deployed.
For a given service, the abstracted view of the required service functions and the order in which they are to be applied is called a Service Function Chain SFC. An SFC is instantiated through selection of specific service function instances on specific network nodes to form a service graph: this is called a Service Function Path SFP.
The service functions may be applied at any layer within the network protocol stack network layer, transport layer, application layer, etc. YANG is a powerful and versatile data modeling language that was designed from the requirements of network operators for an easy to use and robust mechanism for provisioning devices and services across networks.
The number of YANG modules being implemented for interfaces, devices, and service is growing rapidly. Expires September 6, [Page 10] Internet-Draft Network Virtualization March It should be noted that there are also other description formats, e.
The ONAP open source project plans to employ it for abstract mobile network slicing models, for instance. A service model is an abstract model, at a higher level than network element or protocol configuration.
It needs to be clearly understood that such a service model is not a configuration model. That is, it does not provide details for configuring network elements or protocols: that work is expected to be carried out in other protocol-specific working groups.
Instead, service models contain the characteristics of the service as discussed between the operators and their customers. A separate process is responsible for mapping this customer service model onto the protocols and network elements depending on how the network operator chooses to realise the service. The model can be used for communication between customers and network operators, and to provide input to automated control and configuration applications.
It is recognized that it would be beneficial to have a common base model that addresses multiple popular L2VPN service types.
That is, it does not provide details for configuring network elements or protocols. Instead it contains the characteristics of the service.
Architectural Observations This section makes some observations about architectural trends and issues. Role of Software An obvious trend is that bigger and bigger parts of the functionality in a network is driven by software, e.
The software components are where the intelligence is, and a smaller fraction of the intelligence resides in network elements, nor is the intelligence encoded in the behaviour rules of the protocols that the network elements use to communicate with each other. A natural consequence of this is the simplification and perhaps commoditization of network elements, while the "intelligent" or higher value functions migrate to the center.
The benefits are largely in the manageability, control, and speed of change. There are, however, potential pitfalls to be aware of as well. First off, networks need to continue to be operate even Arkko, et al. Expires September 6, [Page 12] Internet-Draft Network Virtualization March under partial connectivity situations and breakage, and it is key that designs can handle those situations as well. And it is important that network users and peers continue to be able to operate and connect in the distributed, voluntary manner that we have today.
Today's virtualization technology is primarily used to manage single administrative domains and to offer specific service to others. One could imagine centralised models being taken too far as well, limiting the ability of other network owners to manage their own networks.
Tailored vs. It is important to find the right balance here. From an economics perspective, it may not be feasible to provide specialised service -- at least if it requires human effort -- for large fraction of use cases. Even if those are very useful in critical applications.
Need for descriptions As networks deal more and more with virtual services, there arises a need to have generally understood, portable descriptions of these service. We can also identify some potential architectural principles, such as: Data model layering Given the heterogenuity of networking technologies and the differing users that data models are being designed for, it seems difficult to provide a single-level model.
Spin up the three machines, and you are ready. You can test both single-node and multi-node swarm scenarios on Linux machines. You can test both single-node and multi-node swarm from this computer, but you need to use Docker Machine to test the multi-node scenarios.
You can use Docker Desktop for Mac or Windows to test single-node features of swarm mode, including initializing a swarm with a single node, creating services, and scaling services.
However, you can use the included version of Docker Machine to create the swarm nodes see Get started with Docker Machine and a local VM , then follow the tutorial for all multi-node features. For this scenario, you run commands from a Docker Desktop for Mac or Docker Desktop for Windows host, but that Docker host itself is not participating in the swarm. The IP address of the manager machine The IP address must be assigned to a network interface available to the host operating system.
All nodes in the swarm need to connect to the manager at the IP address. Because other nodes contact the manager node on its IP address, you should use a fixed IP address.
You can run ifconfig on Linux or macOS to see a list of the available network interfaces. The tutorial uses manager1 :