Electrical computers and digital processing systems: multicomput – Computer-to-computer data routing
Reexamination Certificate
1998-05-08
2001-06-05
Meky, Moustafa M. (Department: 2153)
Electrical computers and digital processing systems: multicomput
Computer-to-computer data routing
C709S227000, C709S241000, C709S217000, C709S218000, C709S203000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06243759
ABSTRACT:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
1. Technical Field of the Invention
This invention relates to communications protocols, and more particularly to a system and method for configuring dynamic interfaces between active and inactive states.
2. Background Art
The Routing Information Protocol (RIP) is a defacto standard for the exchange of routing information among gateways and hosts. Two such standards are the RIP-1 and RIP-2. RIP-1 is described in Network Working Group,
Routing Information Protocol,
Request for Comments (RFC) 1058, June 1988, pages 1-33. RIP-2 is described in Network Working Group,
RIP Version
2
Carrying Additional Information,
RFC 1723, November 94, pages 1-9.
The Internet is organized into a number of networks connected by gateways. The networks may be either point-to-point links or more complex networks such as Ethernet or the token ring. Hosts and gateways are presented with IP datagrams addressed to some host. Routing is the method by which the host or gateway decides where to send the datagram. It may be able to send the datagram directly to the destination, if that destination is on one of the networks that are directly connected to the host or gateway. When the destination is not directly connected, and thus not directly reachable, the host or gateway attempts to send the datagram to a gateway that is nearer the destination. The goal of a routing protocol is to supply the information that is needed to do routing. (See Network Working Group,
Routing Information Protocol,
Request for Comments (RFC) 1058, June 1988, pp. 2-3.)
Routing is the task of finding a path from a sender to a desired destination. This may be viewed as a matter of finding gateways between networks. Internet protocol (IP) routing deals with communicating messages from a sender on one such network to a destination on a different one. In that case, the message must pass through gateways connecting the networks. If the networks are not adjacent, the message may pass through several intervening networks and the gateways connecting them. A “network” may cover a single broadcast network (e.g., an Ethernet), a point to point line, or a packet switch network, such as asynchronous transfer mode (ATM). A network is treated as a single entity by IP. Either no routing is necessary (as with a point to point line), or routing is done in a manner transparent to IP, allowing IP to treat the entire network as a single full-connected system. IP is the network layer of the TCP/IP protocol stack.
One of several approaches for finding routes between networks is based on distance vector algorithms. In this approach, each entity (gateway or host) that participates in the routing protocol is assumed to keep in a routing database information about all of the destinations within the system. Each entry in this routing database includes the next gateway to which datagrams destined for the entity should be sent and a “metric” measuring the total distance to the entity. Distance is a generalized concept which may also cover the time delay in getting messages to the entity or the dollar cost of sending messages to it. Routing information is exchanged only among entities that are adjacent; that is, entities that share a common network.
A typical routing database implementation includes the following information about each destination:
address: in IP implementations, this will be the IP address of the host or network.
gateway: the first gateway along the route to the destination.
interface: the physical network which must be used to reach the first gateway.
metric: a number, indicating the distance to the destination.
timer: the amount of time since the entry was last updated.
This database is initialized with a description of the entities that are directly connected to the system. It is updated according to information received in messages from neighboring gateways. Each entity participating in the routing scheme sends update messages that describe the routing database as it currently exists in that entity. Optimal routes for the entire system may be maintained using only information obtained from neighboring entities.
Distance vector algorithms are based on a table giving the best route to every destination in the system. A metric is used to define “best”. In simple networks it is common to use a metric that simply counts how many gateways a message must go through (sometimes referred to as the number of hops.) In more complex networks, a metric may be chosen to represent the total amount of delay the message suffers, the cost of sending it, or some other quantity which may be minimized. In each approach, the metric represents a sum of costs for individual hops.
A host or gateway G keeps, for each destination in the system a current estimate of the metric for that destination and the identity of the neighboring gateway on whose data that metric is based. If the destination is on a network that is directly connect to gateway G, then G uses an entry that shows the cost of using the network, and the fact that no gateway is needed to get to the destination. This combination of destination, metric, and gateway is typically referred to as a route to the destination with that metric, using that gateway.
Periodically, each gateway or host sends a routing update to every neighbor. The update is a set of messages that contain all of the information from the routing table. Two such update messages are the RIP-1 and the RIP-2 messages. (The format of a RIP-1 message is shown in Routing Information Protocol, Request for Comments (RFC) 1058, and that of a RIP-2 message in RIP Version 2 Carrying Additional Information, RFC 1723.) The routing table contains an entry for the route with the best metric for each active destination, with the distance shown to that destination. When a routing update arrives from a neighbor G′, this gateway G adds the cost associated with the network that is shared with G′ (the network over which the update arrived), and the result compared with the current entry in this gateway's routing table for the destination. If the metric is less, the table entry is updated to the new metric and gateway. Even if the metric is more, if it came from the same gateway, then the table entry is updated to the new, larger metric.
An improved method and system for exchanging routing information is described in co-pending patent application, Ser. No. 09/075,044 filed May 8, 1998, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,167,444, the teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference.
There are two basic schemes used to manage IP address assignments for point to point (PPP) links. These are (1) fixed assignment and (2) dynamic assignment. Fixed assignment is generally used for dedicated links while dynamic assignment is used for dial-up. Historically, dynamic address assignment was used for single remote workstations which don't require the need to run a dynamic routing protocol. An address depletion problem exists today which has resulted in the need to use dynamic address assignment for entire remote local area networks (LANs). As a result, it has been necessary to run dynamic routing protocols over interfaces that don't have single fixed IP addresses.
While running the Routing Information Protocol (RIP), dynamic interfaces can change their state from active to inactive and the reverse. When such an interface becomes active from an inactive state, it may or may not have the same IP address associated with it. If needed, it would be difficult to configure such a dynamic interface because there exists no constant value that can be used to identify the interface.
Consequently, it is an object of the invention to provide a constant value for identifying a dynamic interface.
It is a further object of the invention to provide an improved system and method for configuring a dynamic interface.
It is a further object of the invention to provide constant values identifying the configurations of dynamic interfaces.
It is a further object of the invention to provide the processing advantages of running a dynamic routing p
Boden Edward Barnes
Gebler, Jr. Paul Albert
Gruber Franklin Alfred
Beckstrand Shelly M
International Business Machines - Corporation
Meky Moustafa M.
Salad Abdullahi E.
LandOfFree
Method and system for configuring dynamic interfaces does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Method and system for configuring dynamic interfaces, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Method and system for configuring dynamic interfaces will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-2460697