home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
Text File | 1999-10-14 | 41.9 KB | 1,068 lines |
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Network Working Group A. Conta
- Request for Comments: 2590 Lucent
- Category: Standards Track A. Malis
- Ascend
- M. Mueller
- Lucent
- May 1999
-
-
- Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay Networks
- Specification
-
- 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.
-
- Copyright Notice
-
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
-
- Abstract
-
- This memo describes mechanisms for the transmission of IPv6 packets
- over Frame Relay networks.
-
- Table of Contents
-
- 1. Introduction.................................................2
- 2. Maximum Transmission Unit....................................3
- 3. Frame Format.................................................4
- 4. Stateless Autoconfiguration..................................5
- 4.1 Generating the MID field.................................7
- 5. Link-Local Address...........................................9
- 6. Address Mapping -- Unicast, Multicast........................9
- 7. Sending Neighbor Discovery Messages.........................14
- 8. Receiving Neighbor Discovery Messages.......................15
- 9. Security Considerations.....................................15
- 10. Acknowledgments............................................16
- 11. References.................................................16
- 12. Authors' Addresses.........................................18
- 13. Full Copyright Statement...................................19
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 1]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 1. Introduction
-
- This document specifies the frame format for transmission of IPv6
- packets over Frame Relay networks, the method of forming IPv6 link-
- local addresses on Frame Relay links, and the mapping of the IPv6
- addresses to Frame Relay addresses. It also specifies the content of
- the Source/Target link-layer address option used in Neighbor
- Discovery [ND] and Inverse Neighbor Discovery [IND] messages when
- those messages are transmitted over a Frame Relay link. It is part
- of a set of specifications that define such IPv6 mechanisms for Non
- Broadcast Multi Access (NBMA) media [IPv6-NBMA], [IPv6-ATM], and a
- larger set that defines such mechanisms for specific link layers
- [IPv6-ETH], [IPv6-FDDI], [IPv6-PPP], [IPv6-ATM], etc...
-
- The information in this document applies to Frame Relay devices which
- serve as end stations (DTEs) on a public or private Frame Relay
- network (for example, provided by a common carrier or PTT.) Frame
- Relay end stations can be IPv6 hosts or routers. In this document
- they are referred to as nodes.
-
- In a Frame Relay network, a number of virtual circuits form the
- connections between the attached stations (nodes). The resulting set
- of interconnected devices forms a private Frame Relay group which may
- be either fully interconnected with a complete "mesh" of virtual
- circuits, or only partially interconnected. In either case, each
- virtual circuit is uniquely identified at each Frame Relay interface
- (card) by a Data Link Connection Identifier (DLCI). In most
- circumstances, DLCIs have strictly local significance at each Frame
- Relay interface.
-
- A Frame Relay virtual circuit acts like a virtual-link (also referred
- to as logical-link), with its own link parameters, distinct from the
- parameters of other virtual circuits established on the same wire or
- fiber. Such parameters are the input/output maximum frame size,
- incoming/outgoing requested/agreed throughput, incoming/outgoing
- acceptable throughput, incoming/outgoing burst size,
- incoming/outgoing frame rate.
-
- By default a DLCI is 10 bits in length. Frame Relay specifications
- define also 16, 17, or 23 bit DLCIs. The former is not used, while
- the latter two are suggested for use with SVCs.
-
- Frame Relay virtual circuits can be created administratively as
- Permanent Virtual Circuits -- PVCs -- or dynamically as Switched
- Virtual Circuits -- SVCs. The mechanisms defined in this document
- are intended to apply to both permanent and switched Frame Relay
- virtual circuits, whether they are point to point or point to multi-
- point.
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 2]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- The keywords MUST, MUST NOT, MAY, OPTIONAL, REQUIRED, RECOMMENDED,
- SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT are to be interpreted as defined
- in [RFC 2119].
-
- 2. Maximum Transmission Unit
-
- The IPv6 minimum MTU is defined in [IPv6].
-
- In general, Frame Relay devices are configured to have a maximum
- frame size of at least 1600 octets. Therefore, the default IPv6 MTU
- size for a Frame Relay interface is considered to be 1592.
-
- A smaller than default frame size can be configured but of course not
- smaller than the minimum IPv6 MTU.
-
- An adequate larger than default IPv6 MTU and Frame Relay frame size
- can be configured to avoid fragmentation. The maximum frame size is
- controlled by the CRC generation mechanisms employed at the HDLC
- level. CRC16 will protect frames up to 4096 bytes in length, which
- reduces the effective maximum frame size to approximately 4088 bytes.
- A larger desired frame size (such as that used by FDDI or Token
- Ring), would require the CRC32 mechanism, which is not yet widely
- used and is not mandatory for frame relay systems conforming to Frame
- Relay Forum and ITU-T standards.
-
- In general, if upper layers provide adequate error
- protection/detection mechanisms, implementations may allow
- configuring a Frame Relay link with a larger than 4080 octets frame
- size but with a lesser error protection/detection mechanism at link
- layer. However, because IPv6 relies on the upper and lower layer
- error detection, configuring the IPv6 MTU to a value larger than 4080
- is strongly discouraged.
-
- Although a Frame Relay circuit allows the definition of distinct
- maximum frame sizes for input and output, for simplification
- purposes, this specification assumes symmetry, i.e. the same MTU for
- both input and output.
-
- Furthermore, implementations may limit the setting of the Frame Relay
- maximum frame size to the interface (link, or card) level, which then
- is enforced on all of the PVCs or SVCs on that interface (on that
- link, or card). For an SVC, the maximum frame size parameter
- negotiated during circuit setup will not exceed the configured
- maximum frame size.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 3]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 3. IPv6 Frame Format
-
- The IPv6 frame encapsulation for Frame Relay (for both PVCs and SVCs)
- follows [ENCAPS], which allows a VC to carry IPv6 packets along with
- other protocol packets. The NLPID frame format is used, in which the
- IPv6 NLPID has a value of 0x8E:
-
- 0 1 (Octets)
- +-----------------------+-----------------------+
- (Octets)0 | |
- / Q.922 Address /
- / (length 'n' equals 2 or 4) /
- | |
- +-----------------------+-----------------------+
- n | Control (UI) 0x03 | NLPID 0x8E | NLPID
- +-----------------------+-----------------------+ indicating
- n+2 | . | IPv6
- / . /
- / IPv6 packet /
- | . |
- +-----------------------+-----------------------+
- | |
- + FCS +
- | |
- +-----------------------+-----------------------+
-
- "n" is the length of the Q.922 address which can be 2 or 4 octets.
-
- The Q.922 representation of a DLCI (in canonical order - the first
- bit is stored in the least significant, i.e., the right-most bit
- of a byte in memory) [CANON] is the following:
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- (octet) 0 | DLCI(high order) | 0 | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 1 | DLCI(low order) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
- 10 bits DLCI
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 4]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- (octet) 0 | DLCI(high order) | 0 | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 1 | DLCI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 2 | DLCI(low order) | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 3 | unused (set to 0) | 1 | 1 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
- 17 bits DLCI
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- (octet) 0 | DLCI(high order) | 0 | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----
- 1 | DLCI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 2 | DLCI | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 3 | DLCI (low order) | 0 | 1 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
- 23 bits DLCI
-
- The encapsulation of data or control messages exchanged by various
- protocols that use SNAP encapsulation (with their own PIDs) is not
- affected. The encoding of the IPv6 protocol identifier in such
- messages MUST be done according to the specifications of those
- protocols, and [ASSNUM].
-
- 4. Stateless Autoconfiguration
-
- An interface identifier [AARCH] for an IPv6 Frame Relay interface
- must be unique on a Frame Relay link [AARCH], and must be unique on
- each of the virtual links represented by the VCs terminated on the
- interface.
-
- The interface identifier for the Frame Relay interface is locally
- generated by the IPv6 module.
-
- Each virtual circuit in a Frame Relay network is uniquely identified
- on a Frame Relay interface by a DLCI. Furthermore, a DLCI can be seen
- as an identification of the end point of a virtual circuit on a Frame
- Relay interface. Since each Frame Relay VC is configured or
- established separately, and acts like an independent virtual-link
- from other VCs in the network, or on the interface, link, wire or
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 5]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- fiber, it seems beneficial to view each VC's termination point on the
- Frame Relay interface as a "pseudo-interface" or "logical-interface"
- overlaid on the Frame Relay interface. Furthermore, it seems
- beneficial to be able to generate and associate an IPv6
- autoconfigured address (including an IPv6 link local address) to each
- "pseudo-interface", i.e. end-point of a VC, i.e. to each DLCI on a
- Frame Relay interface.
-
- In order to achieve the benefits described above, the mechanisms
- specified in this document suggest constructing the Frame Relay
- interface identifier from 3 distinct fields (Fig.1):
-
- (a) The "EUI bits" field. Bits 6 and 7 of the first octet,
- representing the EUI-64 "universal/local" and respectively
- "individual/group" bits converted to IPv6 use. The former is set
- to zero to reflect that the 64 bit interface identifier value
- has local significance [AARCH]. The latter is set to 0 to
- reflect the unicast address [AARCH].
-
- (b) The "Mid" field. A 38 bit field which is generated with the
- purpose of adding uniqueness to the interface identifier.
-
- (c) The "DLCI" field. A 24 bit field that MAY hold a 10, 17, or 23
- bit DLCI value which MUST be extended with 0's to 24 bits. A
- DLCI based interface identifier -- which contains a valid DLCI
- -- SHOULD be generated as a result of successfully establishing
- a VC -- PVC or SVC.
-
- If a DLCI is not known, the field MUST be set to the
- "unspecified DLCI" value which consists of setting each of the
- 24 bits to 1.
-
- Since DLCIs are local to a Frame Relay node, it is possible to have
- Frame Relay distinct virtual circuits within a Frame Relay network
- identified with the same DLCI values.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 6]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- (Octets) 0 | |"EUI bits" |
- + +-----+-----+
- 1 | |
- + +
- 2 | "Mid" |
- + +
- 3 | |
- + +
- 4 | |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 5 | |
- + +
- 6 | "DLCI" |
- + +
- 7 | |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
- Fig.1 Frame Relay Pseudo-Interface Identifier
-
- The Duplicate Address Detection specified in [AUTOCONF] is used
- repeatedly during the interface identifier and local-link address
- generation process, until the generated identifier and consequently
- the link-local address on the link -- VC -- are unique.
-
- 4.1 Generating the "Mid" field.
-
- The "Mid" can be generated in multiple ways. This specification
- suggests two mechanisms:
-
- (b.1) "Use of Local Administrative Numbers"
-
- The "Mid" is filled with the result of merging:
-
- (b.1.1) A random number of 6 bits in length (Fig.2).
-
-
- (b.1.2) The Frame Relay Node Identifier -- 16 bits -- is a user
- administered value used to locally identify a Frame Relay
- node (Fig.2).
-
- (b.1.3) The Frame Relay Link Identifier -- 16 bits -- is a numerical
- representation of the Frame Relay interface or link (Fig.2).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 7]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- (Octets) 0 | Random Number | MBZ |
- +-----------------------------------+-----+-----+
- 1 | |
- + Frame Relay Node Identifier +
- 2 | |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 3 | |
- + Frame Relay Link Identifier +
- 4 | |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 5 | |
- + +
- 6 | "DLCI" |
- + +
- 7 | |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
- Fig.2 Frame Relay Pseudo-Interface Identifier
-
- or,
-
- (b.2) "Use of The Frame Relay address - E.164 [E164], X.121
- [X25] numbers, or NSAP [NSAP] address"
-
- If a Frame Relay interface has an E.164 or a X.121 number, or an
- NSAP address, the "Mid" field MUST be filled in with a number
- resulted from it as follows: the number represented by the BCD
- encoding of the E.164 or X.121 number, or the binary encoding of
- the NSAP address is truncated to 38 bits (Fig.3). Since the Frame
- Relay interface identifier has a "local" significance, the use of
- such a value has no real practical purposes other than adding to
- the uniqueness of the interface identifier on the link. Therefore
- the truncation can be performed on the high order or low order
- bits. If the high order bits truncation does not provide
- uniqueness on the link -- perhaps the DLCI value is not unique --
- this most likely means that the VC spans more for instance than a
- national and/or international destination area for an E.164
- number, and therefore the truncation of the low order bits should
- be performed next, which most likely will provide the desired
- uniqueness.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 8]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- (Octets) 0 | | MBZ |
- + +-----+-----+
- 1 | |
- + E.164, X.121 (BCD encoding) +
- 2 | or NSAP Address |
- + +
- 3 | (truncated to 38 bits) |
- + +
- 4 | |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 5 | |
- + +
- 6 | "DLCI" |
- + +
- 7 | |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
- Fig.3 Frame Relay (Pseudo) Interface Identifier
-
- 5. Link-Local Addresses
-
- The IPv6 link-local address [AARCH] for an IPv6 Frame Relay interface
- is formed by appending the interface identifier, formed as defined
- above, to the prefix FE80::/64 [AARCH].
-
- 10 bits 54 bits 64 bits
- +----------+-----------------------+----------------------------+
- |1111111010| (zeros) |Frame Relay Interface Ident.|
- +----------+-----------------------+----------------------------+
-
- 6. Address Mapping -- Unicast, Multicast
-
- The procedure for mapping IPv6 addresses to link-layer addresses is
- described in [IPv6-ND]. Additionally, extensions to Neighbor
- Discovery (ND) that allow the mapping of link-layer addresses to IPv6
- addresses are defined as Inverse Neighbor Discovery (IND) in [IND].
- This document defines the formats of the link-layer address fields
- used by ND and IND. This specification does not define an algorithmic
- mapping of IPv6 multicast addresses to Frame Relay link-layer
- addresses.
-
- The Source/Target Link-layer Address option used in Neighbor
- Discovery and Inverse Neighbor Discovery messages for a Frame Relay
- link follows the general rules defined by [IPv6-ND]. IPv6 addresses
- can map two type of identifiers equivalent to link-layer addresses:
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 9]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- DLCIs, and Frame Relay Addresses. Therefore, for Frame Relay, this
- document defines two distinct formats for the ND and IND messages
- Link-Layer Address field:
-
- (a) DLCI Format -- used in ND and/or IND messages on VCs that were
- established prior to the ND or IND message exchange -- mostly
- PVCs. The use on SVCs makes sense with Inverse Neighbor
- Discovery [IND] messages if IND is employed after the successful
- establishing of an SVC to gather information about other IPv6
- addresses assigned to the remote node and that SVC.
-
- (b) Frame Relay Address Format -- used mostly prior to establishing
- a new SVC, to get the Frame Relay remote node identifier
- (link-layer address) mapping to a certain IPv6 address.
-
- Note: An implementation may hold both types of link layer
- identifiers in the Neighbor Discovery cache. Additionally, in
- case of multiple VCs between two nodes, one node's Neighbor
- Discovery cache may hold a mapping of one of the remote node's
- IPv6 addresses to each and every DLCI identifying the VCs.
-
- The mechanisms which in such an implementation would make the
- distinction between the Neighbor Discovery Cache mapping of an
- IPv6 address to a "Frame Relay Address Format" and a "DLCI
- Format" link-layer address, or among several mappings to a "DLCI
- Format" addresses are beyond the scope of this specification.
-
- The use of the override "O" bit in the advertisement messages
- that contain the above Link-Layer Address formats SHOULD be
- consistent with the [ND] specifications. Additionally, there
- should be consistency related to the type of Link-Layer Address
- format: an implementation should override one address format in
- its Neighbor Discovery cache with the same type of address
- format.
-
- The "DLCI Format" is defined as follows:
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 0 | Type |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 1 | Length |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 10]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- with a DLCI (Q.922 address) encoded as option value:
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 2 | | 1 | 1 |
- + unused +-----+-----+
- 3 | |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 4 | DLCI(high order) | 0 | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 5 | DLCI(low order) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 6 | |
- + Padding +
- 7 | (zeros) |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
- 10 bits DLCI
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 2 | | 1 | 1 |
- + unused +-----+-----+
- 3 | |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 4 | DLCI(high order) | 0 | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 5 | DLCI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 6 | DLCI(low order) | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 7 | unused (set to 0) | 1 | 1 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
- 17 bits DLCI
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 11]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 2 | | 1 | 1 |
- + unused +-----+-----+
- 3 | |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 4 | DLCI(high order) | 0 | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----
- 5 | DLCI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 6 | DLCI | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 7 | DLCI (low order) | 0 | 1 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
- 23 bits DLCI
-
-
- Option fields:
-
- Type 1 for Source Link-layer address.
- 2 for Target Link-layer address.
-
- Length The Length of the Option (including the Type
- and Length fields) in units of 8 octets.
- It has the value 1.
-
- Link-Layer Address The DLCI encoded as a Q.922 address.
-
- Description
-
- The "DLCI Format" option value field has two components:
-
-
- (a) Address Type -- encoded in the first two bits of the first
- two octets. Both bits are set to 1 to indicate the DLCI
- format. The rest of the bits in the two first octets are
- not used -- they MUST be set to zero on transmit and MUST
- be ignored by the receiver.
-
- (b) DLCI -- encoded as a Q.922 address padded with zeros to the
- last octet of the 6 octets available for the entire Link-
- Layer Address field of this format.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 12]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- The "Frame Relay Address Format" is defined as follows:
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 0 | Type |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 1 | Length |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
- with an E.164, X.121, number or NSAP address encoded as option
- value:
-
- 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 (bit order)
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 2 | size | 1 | 0 |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 3 | E.164 or X.121, or NSAP |
- +--- Address Family Number ---+
- 4 | (Assigned Number) |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 5 | |
- / E.164, or X.121 number (BCD encoded) /
- / or NSAP address /
- 4+size | |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- 5+size | |
- / Padding /
- / (zeros) /
- 8*Length-1| |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
-
- Option fields:
-
- Type 1 for Source Link-layer address.
- 2 for Target Link-layer address.
-
- Length The length of the Option (including the
- Type and Length fields) in units of 8 octet.
- It may have the value:
-
- 2 -- for E.164, or X.121 numbers or NSAP
- addresses not longer than 11 octets
- [E164], [X25], [NSAP].
-
- 3 -- for NSAP addresses longer than 11 but
- not longer than 19 octets.
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 13]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 4 -- for NSAP addresses longer than 19 octets
- (not longer than the maximum NSAP address
- length) [NSAP].
-
- Link-Layer Address The E.164, X.121, number encoded in
- Binary Coded Decimal (BCD), or the NSAP
- address.
-
- Description
-
- The "Frame Relay Address" option value has three components:
-
- (a) Address Type -- encoded in the first two bits of the first
- octet. The first bit is set to 0, the second bit is set to 1.
-
- (b) Size -- encoded in the last (high order) 6 bits of the first
- octet. The maximum value of the field is the maximum size of
- the E.164, X.121, or NSAP addresses.
-
- (c) Address Family Number -- the number assigned for the E.164,
- X.121, or NSAP address family [ASSNUM].
-
- (d) E.164, X.121, number -- encoded in BCD (two digits per octet).
- If the E.164, or X.121 has an even number of digits the
- encoding will fill all encoding octets -- half the number of
- digits. If the E.164, or X.121 number has an odd number of
- digits, the lowest order digit fills only half of an octet --
- it is placed in the first 4 bits of the last octet of the
- E.164, or X.121 BCD encoding. The rest of the field up to the
- last octet of the 11 octets available is padded with zeros.
-
- NSAP address -- the NSAP address. It is padded with zeros if
- the NSAP address does not fit in a number of octets that makes
- the length of the option an even number of 8 octets.
-
- 7. Sending Neighbor Discovery Messages
-
- Frame Relay networks do not provide link-layer native multicasting
- mechanisms. For the correct functioning of the Neighbor Discovery
- mechanisms, link-layer multicasting must be emulated.
-
- To emulate multicasting for Neighbor Discovery (ND) the node MUST
- send frames carrying ND multicast packets to all VCs on a Frame Relay
- interface. This applies to ND messages addressed to both all-node and
- solicited-node multicast addresses. This method works well with PVCs.
- A mesh of PVCs MAY be configured and dedicated to multicast traffic
- only. An alternative to a mesh of PVCs is a set of point-to-
- multipoint PVCs.
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 14]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 8. Receiving Neighbor Discovery Messages
-
- If a Neighbor Discovery Solicitation message received by a node
- contains the Source link-layer address option with a DLCI, the
- message MUST undergo Frame Relay specific preprocessing required for
- the correct interpretation of the field during the ND protocol engine
- processing. This processing is done before the Neighbor Discovery
- message is processed by the Neighbor Discovery (ND) protocol engine.
-
- The motivation for this processing is the local significance of the
- DLCI fields in the Neighbor Discovery message: the DLCI significance
- at the sender node is different than the DLCI significance at the
- receiver node. In other words, the DLCI that identifies the Frame
- Relay virtual circuit at the sender may be different than the DLCI
- that identifies the virtual circuit at the receiver node.
- Furthermore, the sender node may not be aware of the DLCI value at
- the receiver. Therefore, the Frame Relay specific preprocessing
- consists in modifying the Neighbor Discovery Solicitation message
- received, by storing into the Source link-layer address option the
- DLCI value of the virtual circuit on which the frame was received, as
- known to the receiver node. The DLCI value being stored must be
- encoded in the appropriate format (see previous sections). The
- passing of the DLCI value from the Frame Relay module to the Neighbor
- Discovery preprocessing module is an implementation choice.
-
- 9. Security Considerations
-
- The mechanisms defined in this document for generating an IPv6 Frame
- Relay interface identifier are intended to provide uniqueness at link
- level -- virtual circuit. The protection against duplication is
- achieved by way of IPv6 Stateless Autoconfiguration Duplicate Address
- Detection mechanisms. Security protection against forgery or accident
- at the level of the mechanisms described here is provided by the IPv6
- security mechanisms [IPSEC], [IPSEC-Auth], [IPSEC-ESP] applied to
- Neighbor Discovery [IPv6-ND] or Inverse Neighbor Discovery [IND]
- messages.
-
- To avoid an IPsec Authentication verification failure, the Frame
- Relay specific preprocessing of a Neighbor Discovery Solicitation
- message that contains a DLCI format Source link-layer address option,
- MUST be done by the receiver node after it completed IP Security
- processing.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 15]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 10. Acknowledgments
-
- Thanks to D. Harrington, and M. Merhar for reviewing this document
- and providing useful suggestions. Also thanks to G. Armitage for his
- reviewing and suggestions. Many thanks also to Thomas Narten for
- suggestions on improving the document.
-
- 11. References
-
- [AARCH] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IPv6 Addressing
- Architecture", RFC 2373, July 1998.
-
- [ASSNUM] Reynolds, J. and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", STD 2,
- RFC 1700, October 1994. See also:
- http://www.iana.org/numbers.html
-
- [AUTOCONF] Thomson, S. and T. Narten, "IPv6 Stateless
- Autoconfiguration", RFC 2462, December 1998.
-
- [CANON] Narten, T. and C. Burton, "A Caution on the Canonical
- Ordering of Link-Layer Addresses", RFC 2469, December
- 1998.
-
- [ENCAPS] Brown, C. and A. Malis, "Multiprotocol Interconnect over
- Frame Relay", STD 55, RFC 2427, November 1998.
-
- [IND] Conta, A., "Extensions to IPv6 Neighbor Discovery for
- Inverse Discovery", Work in Progress, December 1998.
-
- [IPv6] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol Version 6
- Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.
-
- [IPv6-ATM] Armitage, G., Schulter, P. and M. Jork, "IPv6 over ATM
- Networks", RFC 2492, January 1999.
-
- [IPv6-ETH] Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 packets over
- Ethernet Networks", RFC 2464, December 1998.
-
- [IPv6-FDDI] Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 packets over FDDI
- Networks", RFC 2467, December 1998.
-
- [IPv6-NBMA] Armitage, G., Schulter, P., Jork, M. and G. Harter,
- "IPv6 over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA)
- networks", RFC 2491, January 1999.
-
- [IPv6-ND] Narten, T., Nordmark, E. and W. Simpson, "Neighbor
- Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 2461, December
- 1998.
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 16]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- [IPv6-PPP] Haskin, D. and E. Allen, "IP Version 6 over PPP", RFC
- 2472, December 1998.
-
- [IPv6-TR] Narten, T., Crawford, M. and M. Thomas, "Transmission
- of IPv6 packets over Token Ring Networks", RFC 2470,
- December 1998.
-
- [IPSEC] Atkinson, R. and S. Kent, "Security Architecture for the
- Internet Protocol", RFC 2401, November 1998.
-
- [IPSEC-Auth] Atkinson, R. and S. Kent, "IP Authentication Header",
- RFC 2402, December 1998.
-
- [IPSEC-ESP] Atkinson, R. and S. Kent, "IP Encapsulating Security
- Protocol (ESP)", RFC 2406, November 1998.
-
- [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to indicate
- Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
-
- [E164] International Telecommunication Union - "Telephone
- Network and ISDN Operation, Numbering, Routing, amd
- Mobile Service", ITU-T Recommendation E.164, 1991.
-
- [NSAP] ISO/IEC, "Information Processing Systems -- Data
- Communications -- Network Service Definition Addendum 2:
- Network Layer Addressing". International Standard
- 8348/Addendum 2, ISO/IEC JTC 1, Switzerland 1988.
-
- [X25] "Information Technology -- Data Communications -- X.25
- Packet Layer Protocol for Data Terminal Equipment",
- International Standard 8208, March 1988.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 17]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 12. Authors' Addresses
-
- Alex Conta
- Lucent Technologies Inc.
- 300 Baker Ave, Suite 100
- Concord, MA 01742
-
- Phone: +1-978-287-2842
- EMail: aconta@lucent.com
-
-
- Andrew Malis
- Ascend Communications
- 1 Robbins Rd
- Westford, MA 01886
-
- Phone: +1-978-952-7414
- EMail: malis@ascend.com
-
-
- Martin Mueller
- Lucent Technologies Inc.
- 300 Baker Ave, Suite 100
- Concord, MA 01742
-
- PHone: +1-978-287-2833
- EMail: memueller@lucent.com
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 18]
-
- RFC 2590 IPv6 over Frame Relay Networks May 1999
-
-
- 13. Full Copyright Statement
-
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
-
- This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
- others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
- or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
- and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
- kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
- included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
- document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
- the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
- Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
- developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
- copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
- followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
- English.
-
- The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
- revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
-
- This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
- "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
- TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
- BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
- HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
- MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
-
- Acknowledgement
-
- Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
- Internet Society.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Conta, et al. Standards Track [Page 19]
-
-