diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc1663.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc1663.txt | 451 |
1 files changed, 451 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc1663.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc1663.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..384d710 --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc1663.txt @@ -0,0 +1,451 @@ + + + + + + +Network Working Group D. Rand +Request for Comments: 1663 Novell +Category: Standards Track July 1994 + + + PPP Reliable Transmission + +Status of this Memo + + This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the + Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for + improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet + Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state + and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. + +Abstract + + The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) [1] provides a standard method for + transporting multi-protocol datagrams over point-to-point links. + + This document defines a method for negotiating and using Numbered- + Mode, as defined by ISO 7776 [2], to provide a reliable serial link. + + This document is the product of the Point-to-Point Protocol Working + Group of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Comments should + be submitted to the ietf-ppp@ucdavis.edu mailing list. + +Table of Contents + + 1. Introduction .......................................... 1 + 2. Physical Layer Requirements ........................... 2 + 3. The Data Link Layer ................................... 2 + 3.1 Frame Format ....................................... 2 + 4. Configuration Option Format ........................... 4 + 5. Numbered-Mode Operation ............................... 5 + 5.1 Single Link ........................................ 6 + 5.2 Inverse Multiplexing ............................... 6 + 5.3 Using Multi-Link Procedure... ...................... 7 + 5.4 LAPB Parameter defaults ............................ 8 + SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS ...................................... 9 + REFERENCES ................................................... 9 + ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................. 9 + CHAIR'S ADDRESS .............................................. 10 + AUTHOR'S ADDRESS ............................................. 10 + + + + + + + +Rand [Page 1] + +RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission July 1994 + + +1. Introduction + + By default, PPP packets over HDLC framed links consist of + "connectionless" datagrams. If reliable transmission over the HDLC + link is desired, the implementation MUST specify the Numbered-Mode + Configuration Option during Link Establishment phase. + + Generally, serial link reliability is not a major issue. The + architecture of protocols used in datagram networking presume + best-effort non-sequential delivery. When errors are detected, + datagrams + are discarded. + + However, in certain circumstances, it is advisable to provide a + reliable link, at least for a subset of the messages. The most + obvious case is when the link is compressed. Since the dictionary is + recovered from the compressed data stream, and a lost datagram + corrupts the dictionary, datagrams must not be lost. Not all + compression types will require a reliable data stream, since the cost + to detect and reset a corrupt dictionary is small. + + The ISO 7776 LAPB can be used guarantee delivery. This is referred + to in this document as "Numbered Mode" to distinguish it from the use + of "Unnumbered Information", which is standard PPP framing practice. + + Where multiple parallel links are used to emulate a single link of + higher speed, Bridged traffic, Source Routed traffic, and traffic + subjected to Van Jacobsen TCP/IP header compression must be delivered + to the higher layer in a certain sequence. However, the fact of the + links being relatively asynchronous makes traffic ordering uncertain. + + The ISO 7776 Multi-Link Procedure MAY be used to restore order. + Implementation of the ISO Multi-Link Procedure is deprecated. It is + recommended that the PPP multilink procedure [4] be used instead. + +2. Physical Layer Requirements + + PPP Reliable Transmission imposes the same requirements that are + described in "PPP in HDLC Framing" [3], with the following + exceptions. + + Control Signals + + While PPP does not normally require the use of control signals, + implementation of Numbered-Mode LAPB or LAPD requires the + provision of control signals, which indicate when the link has + become connected or disconnected. These in turn provide the Up + and Down events to the LCP state machine. + + + +Rand [Page 2] + +RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission July 1994 + + +3. The Data Link Layer + + Numbered-Mode affects only the Address and Control fields. The + remainder of the frame conforms to the framing in use for PPP. + + The Address Field of the frame MUST take the value announced in the + Numbered-Mode Configuration Option, and the Control Field MAY take + any value valid in ISO 7776. + + Once the link enters Numbered-Mode, Numbered-Mode MUST be used on all + frames, as some implementations do not support the use of the + Unnumbered-Information control field or the use of the All-Stations + address intermixed with Numbered-Mode frames. + +3.1. Frame Format + + The following frame format is valid under Numbered-Mode. The fields + are transmitted from left to right. + + Numbered Mode + +----------+----------+----------+ + | Flag | Address | Control | + | 01111110 |1-2 octets|1-2 octets| + +----------+----------+----------+ + +----------+-------------+---------+ + | Protocol | Information | Padding | + |1-2 octets| * | * | + +----------+-------------+---------+ + +----------+----------+----------------- + | FCS | Flag | Inter-frame Fill + | 16 bits | 01111110 | or next Address + +----------+----------+----------------- + + The Protocol, Information and Padding fields are described in the + Point-to-Point Protocol Encapsulation [1]. The FCS and Flag Sequence + fields are described in "PPP in HDLC Framing" [3]. + +4. Configuration Option Format + + Description + + The LCP Numbered-Mode Configuration Option negotiates the use of + Numbered-Mode on the link. By default or ultimate disagreement, + Unnumbered-Mode is used. + + A summary of the Numbered-Mode Configuration Option format is shown + below. The fields are transmitted from left to right. + + + + +Rand [Page 3] + +RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission July 1994 + + + 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 + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | Type | Length | Window | Address... + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + + Type + + 11 + + Length + + >= 4 + + Window + + A value between 1 and 127. This indicates the number of frames + the receiver will buffer, which is the maximum number that the + sender should send without receiving an acknowledgement. If + window < 8, then modulo 8 sequencing is used on the link. + Otherwise, modulo 128 sequencing is used. + + It is conceivable and legal that differing window values might be + announced. However, it is not permitted for one system to use + modulo 8 sequencing and the other to use modulo 128. Therefore, + the rule is: a Configure-Nak may reduce the window but may not + increase it. + + Address + + An HDLC Address as specified in ISO 3309. ISO 7776 specifies four + of the possible values: 1 and 3 for single link operation, 7 and + 15 for the Multi-Link Procedure. Other values consistent with ISO + 3309 are considered legal. + + Implementation of the Multi-Link Procedure is optional; A + + Configure-Nak may therefore force a change from MLP to single link + mode, but not the reverse. + + Should the address be zero upon receipt, the receiver MUST + Configure-Nak with an appropriate address. If both peers send + address zero, the system advertising the numerically smaller + window will select the smaller address. If both windows are the + same size, a random choice MUST be made; when good sources of + randomness are used, the link will converge in a reasonable time. + + + + + +Rand [Page 4] + +RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission July 1994 + + + If magic numbers have been negotiated on the link, the system with + the numerically smaller magic number SHOULD specify the smaller + address. + +5. Numbered-Mode Operation + + When using the Numbered-Mode, each link is established in the usual + manner for the type of link. The Numbered-Mode Configuration Option + is negotiated, the Magic-Number Configuration Option MUST also be + negotiated, and the Address-and-Control-Field-Compression + Configuration Option MUST NOT be negotiated. + + Following the successful negotiation of the Numbered-Mode + Configuration Option during LCP Link Establishment phase, the system + with the numerically smaller Magic-Number will send a SABM or + SABM(E), and the other will respond with a UA. In the event that + either the SABM or UA is lost, this exchange may be repeated + according to the same parameters as the configuration exchange + itself, using the Restart Timer and counter values. Authentication, + Link Quality Determination, and NCP Configuration follow this step. + + Once the link has been established with Numbered-Mode, when re- + negotiation of link configuration occurs, the entire re-negotiation + MUST be conducted in Numbered-Mode. If the Numbered-Mode + Configuration Option is not successfully re-negotiated, the link + reverts to Unnumbered-Information operation prior to Authentication, + Link Quality Determination, and NCP Configuration. + + When an implementation which is capable of Numbered-Mode, and is not + currently configured for Numbered-Mode operation, detects a frame + which has a correct FCS but does not have a UI Control octet, the + implementation MUST send a DM message, immediately followed by a LCP + Configure-Request. + + When an implementation which is currently configured for Numbered- + Mode operation receives a DM message, it MUST revert to Unnumbered- + Information operation, and immediately send a LCP Configure-Request. + +5.1. Single Link + + When Network-Layer packets are sent over a single link, the packets + are encapsulated in the following order: + + +----------+ +----------+ +----------+ + | | | | | Numbered | + | Header |-->| Data |-->| Mode |--> link + | Compress | | Compress | | Header | + +----------+ +----------+ +----------+ + + + +Rand [Page 5] + +RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission July 1994 + + +5.2. Inverse Multiplexing + + Since sending several connections over a single link is often called + "multiplexing", sending packets from a single connection over + multiple parallel links is sometimes called "inverse-multiplexing". + By default, PPP performs no special processing for such links. Each + link is established and terminated independently, negotiates its own + configuration options, and may have different combinations of such + options as ACCM, Protocol Field Compression and IP-Address. This + facilitates using the links simultaneously over dissimilar media, + such as 56K sync with async backup. + + Every link in a single machine MUST have different Magic Numbers, and + each end of every link between two peers SHOULD have Magic Numbers + which are unique to those peers. This protects against patch-panel + errors in addition to looped-back links. + + The distribution to each link is controlled by higher level routing + mechanisms. When Network-Layer specific compression techniques (such + as Van Jacobsen Compression) rely on sequential delivery, without + Multi-Link Procedure support such compression MUST be applied on a + link by link basis. + + +----------+ +----------+ +----------+ + | | | | | Numbered | + +--->| Header |-->| Data |-->| Mode |--> link 1 + | | Compress | | Compress | | Header | + +--------------+ +----------+ +----------+ +----------+ + | Distribution | + +--------------+ +----------+ +----------+ +----------+ + | | | | | | Numbered | + +--->| Header |-->| Data |-->| Mode |--> link 2 + | Compress | | Compress | | Header | + +----------+ +----------+ +----------+ + +5.3. Using Multi-Link Procedure + + This document does not offer a standard for ISO Multi-Link, but does + offer a method for agreeing on the addressing scheme usable with + Multi-Link. A sample implementation is shown below. Implementation + of Multi-Link is not required. + + When using the ISO 7776 Multi-Link Procedure, each link is + established as described above. In addition, the Numbered-Mode + Configuration Option is negotiated with appropriate addresses for the + Multi-Link Procedure. The distribution to each link is controlled by + the Multi-Link Procedure, as is the recovery of sequence in the + receiving system. + + + +Rand [Page 6] + +RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission July 1994 + + + +---> link 1 + +----------+ +----------+ +----------+ | + | | | | | Multi | +--------------+ + | Header |-->| Data |-->| Link |-->| Distribution | + | Compress | | Compress | | Procedure| +--------------+ + +----------+ +----------+ +----------+ | + +---> link 2 + +5.4. LAPB Parameter defaults + + The following guidelines specify the default values of LAPB + configurable parameters. + + Timer T1 + + Timer T1 is the maximum time permitted before a retransmission + is started, as a result of no response to a transmitted I + frame. This value must be greater than the time required for a + maximum sized frame to be received by the other side of the + link, and for a response to be generated for the frame. This + SHOULD be determined dynamically, based on the measured round + trip time delay of the link at the LAPB level. In the event + that the system cannot determine the round trip time of the + link, this value SHOULD be set to twice the bit rate of the + link, divided by the maximum number of bits per frame, plus 100 + milliseconds processing time. For example, on a 14,400 bps + link, with a maximum frame size of 8000 bits (1000 octects), + the T1 value would be set to 3.7 seconds. + + Timer T3 + + Timer T3 gives an indication of the idle state of the link. + Its value must be greater than the T1 value. + + Maximum number of attempts to complete a transmission, N2 + + Parameter N2 gives the maximum number of retransmission + attempts for a given frame. If this value is exceeded, the + link SHOULD be terminated. The default value for parameter N2 + SHOULD be 3. + +Security Considerations + + Security issues are not discussed in this memo. + + + + + + + +Rand [Page 7] + +RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission July 1994 + + +References + + [1] Simpson, W., Editor, "The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)", STD 51, + RFC 1661, Daydreamer, July 1994. + + [2] ISO 7776, Information Processing Systems - Data Communication - + High Level Data Link Control Procedures - Description of the X.25 + LAPB-Compatible DTE Data Link Procedures + + [3] Simpson, W., Editor, "PPP in HDLC Framing", STD 51, RFC 1662, + Daydreamer, July 1994. + + [4] Sklower, K., "PPP MultiLink Procedure", Work in Progress. + +Acknowledgments + + Fred Baker was the original author of this document. + + Bill Simpson contributed materially to the document. + +Chair's Address + + The working group can be contacted via the current chair: + + Fred Baker + Advanced Computer Communications + 315 Bollay Drive + Santa Barbara, California 93117 + + EMail: fbaker@acc.com + +Author's Address + + Questions about this memo can also be directed to: + + Dave Rand + 2180 Fortune Drive + San Jose, CA 95131 + + Phone: +1 408 321-1259 + EMail: dave_rand@novell.com + + + + + + + + + + +Rand [Page 8] + |