Virtual egress packet classification at ingress

• US 7,107,352 B2
• Filed: 07/12/2004
• Issued: 09/12/2006
• Est. Priority Date: 08/22/2001
• Status: Expired due to Term

• Current Assignee: Parity Networks LLC
• Original Assignee: Pluris, Inc
• Inventors: Tuck, III, Russell R., Agarwal, Puneet
• Primary Examiner(s): Lim, Krisna
• Application Number:
  US10/890,065
• Publication Number:
  US 20040246899A1
• Time in Patent Office: 792 Days
• Field of Search: 370/392, 370/389, 709/238
• US Class Current: 709/238
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 45/00 Routing or path finding of packets in data switching networks routing or path finding in wireless networks H04W40/00
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 45/7453 using hashing
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 47/10 Flow control; Congestion control
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 47/2441 relying on flow classification, e.g. using integrated services [IntServ]
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 47/32 by discarding or delaying data units, e.g. packets or frames
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 63/0227 Filtering policies mail message filtering H04L51/212
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 63/0236 Filtering by address, protocol, port number or service, e.g. IP-address or URL
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 63/0263 Rule management
• CPC Class Codes: H04L 63/101 Access control lists [ACL]

Abstract

In a network packet router having one or more ingress and egress ports, a method is implemented at an ingress port for egress pass/drop determination for packets, comprising the steps of (a) noting header combinations and values, and egress port destination for incoming packets; (b) comparing the header combinations and values with rule sets associated with the header combinations and values including egress port identities, and (c) returning a determination of pass or drop for the packet.

Claims

1. In a network packet router having one or more ingress and egress ports, a system implemented at an ingress port for egress pass/drop determination for packets, comprising:

a rule set comprising header combinations and values for which a pass/drop decision may be applied, the set including an egress port identity for each header combination and value set; and

a mechanism noting pertinent headers of a specific incoming packet, and an egress port to which the packet is to be sent, comparing the headers with rules in the rule set, and returning a determination of a rule to be applied.

2. The system of claim 1 wherein the rule set association takes the form of a lookup table.

3. The system of claim 1 wherein the rule returned determines pass or drop for the packet.

4. The system of claim 1 wherein the network is the Internet.

5. The system of claim 1 further comprising a second lookup table for accomplishing ingress rule determinations without egress port numbers.

6. The system of claim 1 wherein a content addressable memory (CAM) is used for header combination matches, and pass/drop is determined by the address location of any match.

7. The system of claim 1 comprising two sections in the CAM, and wherein pass or drop is determined by the section of the CAM wherein a content match is found.

8. The system of claim 6 wherein the CAM is divided into more than two sections, and a result or action is associated with each section.

9. In a network packet router, an ingress port, comprising:

an interface for receiving packets;

a first mechanism for noting header combinations and values, and egress ports for transmission, for individual ones of the received packets; and

a second mechanism comparing the headers and values with a rule set comprising header combinations and values and egress ports, and returning a rule for the packet.

10. The ingress port of claim 9 wherein the rule returned is a pass or drop determination for the packet.

11. The ingress port of claim 9 wherein the rule set association is in the form of a lookup table.

12. The ingress port of claim 9 wherein the network is the Internet.

13. The ingress port of claim 9 further comprising a second rule set association for accomplishing ingress rule determinations without egress port numbers.

14. The ingress port of claim 9 wherein a content addressable memory (CAM) is used for header combination matches, and an associated rule is determined by the address location of any match.

15. The ingress port of claim 14 wherein the CAM is divided into two sections, and a pass or drop determination is determined by the section wherein the address lies for the content match.

16. The ingress port of claim 14 wherein the CAM is divided into more than two sections, and a result or action is associated with each section.

17. A network packet router comprising:

one or more ingress ports; and

one or more egress ports;

characterized in that individual ones of the ingress ports comprise a first mechanism for noting header field combinations and values, and egress ports for transmission, for individual ones of the received packets, and a second mechanism comparing the headers with rules associated with the egress ports and field values, and returning a rule determination for the packet.

18. The router of claim 17 wherein the rule returned determines pass or drop for the associated packet.

19. The router of claim 17 wherein the rule set association takes the form of a lookup table.

20. The router of claim 17 wherein the network is the Internet.

21. The router of claim 17 further comprising a second rule set association for accomplishing ingress pass/drop determinations without egress port numbers.

22. The router of claim 17 wherein a content addressable memory (CAM) is used for header combination matches, and a rule is determined by the address location of any match.

23. The packet router of claim 22 wherein the CAM is divided into two sections, and a pass or drop determination is determined by the section wherein the address lies for the content match.

24. The router of claim 22 wherein the CAM is divided into more than two sections, and a result or action is associated with each section.

25. In a network packet router having one or more ingress and egress ports, a method implemented at an ingress port for determining both ingress and egress rules for packets, comprising the steps of:

(a) noting header combinations and values, and egress port destination for incoming packets;

(b) comparing the header combinations and values and egress port destinations with a rule set associated with the header combinations and values including egress port destinations; and

(c) returning a rule for the packet.

26. The method of claim 25 wherein, in step (c), the rule returned indicates pass or drop for the associated packet.

27. The method of claim 25 wherein the rule set associations take the form of a lookup table.

28. The method of claim 25 wherein the network is the Internet.

29. The method of claim 25 further comprising a second lookup in a separate rule set association for accomplishing ingress rule application determinations without egress port numbers.

30. The method of claim 25 wherein, in step (b), a content addressable memory (CAM) is consulted for rule set matches, and a rule is determined by the address location of any match.

31. The method of claim 30 wherein the CAM is divided into two sections, and pass or drop is determined by the section wherein the address is found for a content match.

32. The method of claim 30 wherein the CAM is divided into more than two sections, and each section is associated with a different result or action.