home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Network Working Group D. Katz
- Request for Comments: 1377 cisco
- November 1992
-
-
- The PPP OSI Network Layer Control Protocol (OSINLCP)
-
- Status of this Memo
-
- This RFC specifies an IAB standards track protocol for the Internet
- community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
- Please refer to the current edition of the "IAB Official Protocol
- Standards" 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 of
- encapsulating Network Layer protocol information over point-to-point
- links. PPP also defines an extensible Link Control Protocol, and
- proposes a family of Network Control Protocols (NCPs) for
- establishing and configuring different network-layer protocols.
-
- This document defines the NCP for establishing and configuring OSI
- Network Layer Protocols.
-
- This memo is the product of the Point-to-Point Protocol Working Group
- of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Comments on this memo
- should be submitted to the ietf-ppp@ucdavis.edu mailing list.
-
- Table of Contents
-
- 1. Introduction .......................................... 2
- 1.1 OSI Network Layer Protocols over PPP .................. 2
- 2. A PPP Network Control Protocol (NCP) for OSI .......... 5
- 2.1 Sending OSI NPDUs ..................................... 6
- 2.2 NPDU Alignment ........................................ 6
- 2.3 Network Layer Addressing Information .................. 6
- 3. OSINLCP Configuration Options ......................... 7
- 3.1 Align-NPDU ............................................ 7
- REFERENCES ................................................... 9
- ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................. 9
- SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS ...................................... 10
- CHAIR'S ADDRESS .............................................. 10
- AUTHOR'S ADDRESS ............................................. 10
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Katz [Page 1]
-
- RFC 1377 PPP OSINLCP November 1992
-
-
- 1. Introduction
-
- PPP has three main components:
-
- 1. A method for encapsulating datagrams over serial links.
-
- 2. A Link Control Protocol (LCP) for establishing, configuring,
- and testing the data-link connection.
-
- 3. A family of Network Control Protocols (NCPs) for establishing
- and configuring different network-layer protocols.
-
- In order to establish communications over a point-to-point link, each
- end of the PPP link must first send LCP packets to configure and test
- the data link. After the link has been established and optional
- facilities have been negotiated as needed by the LCP, PPP must send
- NCP packets to choose and configure one or more network-layer
- protocols. Once each of the chosen network-layer protocols has been
- configured, datagrams from each network-layer protocol can be sent
- over the link.
-
- The link will remain configured for communications until explicit LCP
- or NCP packets close the link down, or until some external event
- occurs (an inactivity timer expires or network administrator
- intervention).
-
- 1.1. OSI Network Layer Protocols over PPP
-
- A number of protocols have been defined for the Network Layer of OSI,
- including the Connectionless Network Layer Protocol (CLNP, ISO 8473)
- [3], the End System to Intermediate System routing protocol (ES-IS,
- ISO 9542) [4], the Intermediate System to Intermediate System routing
- protocol (IS-IS, ISO 10589) [5], and the Inter-Domain Routeing
- Protocol (IDRP, CD 10747) [6]. Generally, these protocols were
- designed to run over non-reliable data link protocols such as PPP.
-
- Network Layer Protocol Identifier (NLPID)
-
- OSI Network Layer protocols can be discriminated according to the
- first octet in each Network Protocol Data Unit (NPDU, that is,
- packet), known as the Network Layer Protocol Identifier (NLPID),
- which is defined in ISO/TR 9577 [7]. This allows the various
- protocols to be run over a common data link without any
- discriminator below the network layer.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Katz [Page 2]
-
- RFC 1377 PPP OSINLCP November 1992
-
-
- Inactive Network Layer Protocol
-
- ISO/TR 9577 reserves a NLPID value of zero to represent the
- "Inactive Network Layer Protocol", as defined in ISO 8473. The
- inactive network layer protocol MUST NOT be used over PPP. This
- assures that whichever OSI network layer protocol is used will
- have a non-zero NLPID value.
-
- Connection-Oriented Network Protocol
-
- The OSI Connection-Oriented Network Protocol (ISO 8208) [8],
- effectively the Packet Layer of CCITT X.25, is intended to be run
- over a reliable data link, such as IEEE 802.2 type II or LAPB.
- Therefore, the unreliable data link service provided by PPP is not
- appropriate for use with ISO 8208.
-
- ConnectionLess Network Protocol (CLNP)
-
- The ConnectionLess Network Protocol offers a simple non-reliable
- datagram service very similar to IP, and is designed to run over a
- non-reliable data link service, such as provided by PPP.
-
- End-System to Intermediate-System Protocol (ES-IS)
-
- ES Hellos and IS Hellos are retransmitted on a periodic timer-
- driven basis (based on expiration of the "Configuration Timer").
- The resulting ES and IS configuration information is invalidated
- on a timer driven basis, based on expiration of the "Holding
- Timer" for each piece of information. The value of a Holding
- Timer is set by the source of the information, and transmitted in
- the Holding Time field of the appropriate ES-IS packet. ISO 9542
- recommends that the holding time field is set to approximately
- twice the Configuration Timer parameter, such that even if every
- other Hello packet is lost the configuration information will be
- retained (implying that the Holding Timer is actually set to
- slightly more than twice the Configuration Timer).
-
- Generally, the recommendation in ISO 9542 is sufficient for PPP
- links. For very unreliable links, it may be necessary to set the
- Holding Timer to be slightly more than three times the
- Configuration Timer to ensure that loss of configuration
- information is an unusual event.
-
- Redirect information is not transmitted on point-to-point links,
- but may be transmitted on general topology subnetworks, which in
- turn may make use of PPP. Redirect information is sent on a
- event-driven basis (based on a CLNP packet being forwarded by a
- router out the incoming interface), but redirect information is
-
-
-
- Katz [Page 3]
-
- RFC 1377 PPP OSINLCP November 1992
-
-
- invalidated on a timer-driven basis. Loss of a single redirect
- may result in a subsequent data packet being sent to the same
- incorrect router, which will re-issue the redirect. This operates
- in the same manner as ICMP redirects for IP packets, and does not
- pose any problem for operation over PPP links.
-
- Intermediate-System to Intermediate-System Protocol (IS-IS)
-
- IS-IS allows for broadcast links (typically LANs), point-to-point
- links (such as PPP), and general topology links (such as X.25
- networks) which are modelled as a collection of point-to-point
- links.
-
- There are four types of IS-IS packets: IS-IS Hello Packets, Link
- State Packets (LSPs), Complete Sequence Number Packets (CSNPs),
- and Partial Sequence Number Packets (PSNPs).
-
- IS-IS Hello messages are transmitted periodically on point-to-
- point links (based on expiration of the "ISISHello" timer).
- Routers expect to receive IS-IS Hello packets periodically.
- Specifically, the IS-IS Hello packet specifies a "Holding Time".
- If no subsequent IS-IS Hello is received over the corresponding
- link for the specified time period, then the neighboring router is
- assumed to have been disconnected or to be down. It is highly
- undesireable for links to "flap" up and down unnecessarily, which
- implies that the holding time needs to be large enough that a link
- is very unlikely to be declared down due to a failure to receive
- an IS-IS Hello. This implies that running IS-IS over unreliable
- data links requires the Holding time to be greater than "k" times
- the ISISHello timer, where k is chosen such that the loss of k
- consecutive IS-IS Hello's is rare. If the quality of the link is
- poor, then the Holding Time will need to be increased or the
- "ISISHello" time decreased.
-
- LSPs are acknowledged by the IS-IS protocol (via use of partial
- sequence number packets). A lost LSP will be recovered from with
- no problem provided that PPP links are treated the same way as
- other point-to-point links. On those rare occasions where a
- partial sequence number packet is lost, this might result in the
- retransmission of a link state packet over a single link, but will
- not impact the correct operation of the routing algorithm.
-
- CSNPs are sent upon link startup on a point-to-point link. This
- does not need to be changed for PPP. If a CSNP fragment is lost
- upon startup it is merely loss of an optimization -- LSPs that did
- not need to be transmitted over the link will be transmitted. If
- a periodic CSNP fragment is lost it merely means that detection of
- low probability database corruption will take longer.
-
-
-
- Katz [Page 4]
-
- RFC 1377 PPP OSINLCP November 1992
-
-
- PSNPs function as ACKs. Loss of a PSNP may result in an
- unnecessary retransmission of an LSP, but does not prevent correct
- operation of the routing protocol.
-
- Inter-Domain Routeing Protocol (IDRP)
-
- IDRP expects to run over datagram links, but requires reliable
- exchange of IDRP information. For this reason, IDRP contains
- built-in reliability mechanisms which ensure that packets will be
- received correctly.
-
- 2. A PPP Network Control Protocol (NCP) for OSI
-
- The OSI Network Layer Control Protocol (OSINLCP) is responsible for
- configuring, enabling, and disabling the OSI protocol modules on both
- ends of the point-to-point link. OSINLCP uses the same packet
- exchange machanism as the Link Control Protocol (LCP). OSINLCP
- packets may not be exchanged until PPP has reached the Network-Layer
- Protocol phase. OSINLCP packets received before this phase is
- reached should be silently discarded.
-
- The OSI Network Layer Control Protocol is exactly the same as the
- Link Control Protocol [1] with the following exceptions:
-
- Frame Modifications
-
- The packet may utilize any modifications to the basic frame format
- which have been negotiated during the Link Establishment phase.
-
- Data Link Layer Protocol Field
-
- Exactly one OSINLCP packet is encapsulated in the Information
- field of a PPP Data Link Layer frame where the Protocol field
- indicates type hex 8023 (OSI Network Layer Control Protocol).
-
- Code field
-
- Only Codes 1 through 7 (Configure-Request, Configure-Ack,
- Configure-Nak, Configure-Reject, Terminate-Request, Terminate-Ack
- and Code-Reject) are used. Other Codes should be treated as
- unrecognized and should result in Code-Rejects.
-
- Timeouts
-
- OSINLCP packets may not be exchanged until PPP has reached the
- Network-Layer Protocol phase. An implementation should be
- prepared to wait for Authentication and Link Quality Determination
- to finish before timing out waiting for a Configure-Ack or other
-
-
-
- Katz [Page 5]
-
- RFC 1377 PPP OSINLCP November 1992
-
-
- response. It is suggested that an implementation give up only
- after user intervention or a configurable amount of time.
-
- Configuration Option Types
-
- OSINLCP has one Configuration Option, which is defined below.
-
- 2.1. Sending OSI NPDUs
-
- Before any Network Protocol Data Units (NPDUs) may be communicated,
- PPP must reach the Network-Layer Protocol phase, and the OSI Network
- Layer Control Protocol must reach the Opened state.
-
- Exactly one OSI NPDU is encapsulated in the Information field of a
- PPP Data Link Layer frame where the Protocol field indicates type hex
- 0023 (OSI Network Layer).
-
- The maximum length of an OSI NPDU transmitted over a PPP link is the
- same as the maximum length of the Information field of a PPP data
- link layer frame. Larger NPDUs must be segmented as necessary. If a
- system wishes to avoid segmentation and reassembly, it should use
- transport layer mechanisms to discourage others from sending large
- PDUs.
-
- 2.2. NPDU Alignment
-
- OSI protocols have peculiar alignment problems due to the fact that
- they are often encapsulated in data link protocols with odd-length
- headers, while PPP defaults to even-length headers. A router
- switching an OSI packet may find that the beginning of the packet
- falls on an inconvenient memory boundary when the hardware used to
- transmit the packet to its next hop requires a particular alignment.
- This situation can be addressed by the use of leading zero padding.
-
- When sending, an implementation MAY insert one to three octets of
- zero between the PPP header and the OSI NPDU. These zero octets
- correspondingly reduce the maximum length of the NPDU that may be
- transmitted.
-
- On reception, any such leading zero octets (if present) MUST be
- removed. Regardless of whether leading zero padding is used, an
- implementation MUST also be able to receive a PPP packet with any
- arbitrary alignment of the NPDU.
-
- 2.3. Network Layer Addressing Information
-
- OSINLCP does not define a separate configuration option for the
- exchange of OSI Network Layer address information. Instead, the ES-
-
-
-
- Katz [Page 6]
-
- RFC 1377 PPP OSINLCP November 1992
-
-
- IS protocol, ISO 9542, should be used. This protocol provides a
- mechanism for determining the Network Layer address(es) of the
- neighbor on the link, as well as determining if the neighbor is an
- End System or an Intermediate System.
-
- A draft addendum to ES-IS [9] is being defined in ISO to add support
- for dynamic address assignment. This addendum has currently passed
- the formal "Committee Draft" (CD) letter ballot.
-
- 3. OSINLCP Configuration Options
-
- OSINLCP Configuration Options allow negotiatiation of desirable
- Internet Protocol parameters. OSINLCP uses the same Configuration
- Option format defined for LCP [1], with a separate set of Options.
-
- The most up-to-date values of the OSINLCP Option Type field are
- specified in the most recent "Assigned Numbers" RFC [2]. Current
- values are assigned as follows:
-
- 1 Align-NPDU
-
- 3.1. Align-NPDU
-
- Description
-
- This Configuration Option provides a way for the receiver to
- negotiate a particular alignment of the OSI NPDU. Empirical
- evidence suggests that the greatest time deficit for re-alignment
- exists at the receiver.
-
- The alignment is accomplished through combination of PPP header
- compression with leading zero padding (see above). It is
- recommended that alignment be entirely through header compression
- combinations whenever possible. For example, an alignment of 3
- could be achieved by combining uncompressed PPP Address and
- Control fields (2 octets) with a compressed PPP Protocol field (1
- octet).
-
- This option is negotiated separately in each direction. A
- receiver which does not need alignment MUST NOT request the
- option. A sender which desires alignment prior to sending SHOULD
- Configure-Nak with an appropriate value.
-
- Implementation Note: In a complex environment, there might be
- several conflicting needs for alignment. It is recommended
- that the receiver request alignment based on the needs of the
- highest speed next hop link. Also, greater efficiency might be
- obtained by negotiating upstream the values requested by
-
-
-
- Katz [Page 7]
-
- RFC 1377 PPP OSINLCP November 1992
-
-
- downstream PPP links, since those packets will not need a
- change in alignment on transit.
-
- The alignment request is advisory, and failure to agree on an
- alignment MUST NOT prevent the OSINLCP from reaching the Opened
- state. By default, the alignment is done according to the needs
- of the sender, and all receivers MUST be capable of accepting
- packets with any alignment.
-
- Vernacular: If you don't like this option, you can refuse to
- negotiate it, and you can send whatever alignment you want.
- However, if you accept the peer's alignment option, then you
- MUST transmit packets with the agreed alignment.
-
- A summary of the Align-NPDU Configuration Option format is shown
- below. The fields are transmitted from left to right.
-
- 0 1 2
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | Type | Length | Alignment |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-
- Type
-
- 1
-
- Length
-
- 3
-
- Alignment
-
- This field specifies the offset of the beginning of the OSI NPDU
- relative to the beginning of the PPP packet header (not including
- any leading Flag Sequences).
-
- A value of 1 through 4 requires an offset of that specific length,
- modulo 4. For example, a value of 1 would require no padding when
- the PPP Address, Control, and Protocol fields are compressed. One
- octet of leading zero padding would be necessary when the PPP
- header is full sized.
-
- A value of 255 requests an offset of an odd length (1 or 3). A
- value of 254 requests an offset of an even length (2 or 4). If
- the sender is not capable of dynamically varying the amount of
- padding, it MUST NAK with one of the two specific values.
-
-
-
-
- Katz [Page 8]
-
- RFC 1377 PPP OSINLCP November 1992
-
-
- References
-
- [1] Simpson, W., "The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)", RFC 1331,
- Daydreamer, May 1992.
-
- [2] Reynolds, J., and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", STD 2, RFC 1340,
- USC/Information Sciences Institute, July 1992.
-
- [3] ISO, "Information processing systems -- Data communications --
- Protocol for providing the connectionless-mode network
- service", ISO 8473, 1988.
-
- [4] ISO, "Information processing systems -- Telecommunications and
- information exchange between systems -- End system to
- Intermediate system Routeing exchange protocol for use in
- conjunction with the protocol for providing the connectionless-
- mode network service (ISO 8473)", ISO 9542, 1988.
-
- [5] ISO, "Information processing systems -- Telecommunications and
- information exchange between systems -- Intermediate system to
- Intermediate system Intra-Domain routeing exchange protocol for
- use in conjunction with the protocol for providing the
- connectionless-mode network service (ISO 8473)", ISO 10589,
- 1990.
-
- [6] ISO, "Protocol for Exchange of Inter-domain Routeing
- Information among Intermediate Systems to Support Forwarding of
- ISO 8473 PDUs", ISO CD 10747, 1991.
-
- [7] ISO, "Information technology -- Telecommunications and
- information exchange between systems -- Protocol identification
- in the network layer", ISO/IEC TR9577:1990.
-
- [8] ISO, "Information processing systems -- Data communications --
- X.25 packet level protocol for Data terminal equipment", ISO
- 8208, 1984.
-
- [9] Taylor, E., "Addendum to ISO 9542 (PDAM 1 - Dynamic Discovery
- of OSI NSAP Addresses by End Systems)", SC6/N7248.
-
- Acknowledgments
-
- Some of the text in this document is taken from previous documents
- produced by the Point-to-Point Protocol Working Group of the Internet
- Engineering Task Force (IETF).
-
- Special thanks to Ross Callon (DEC), and Cyndi Jung (3Com), for
- contributions of text and design suggestions based on implementation
-
-
-
- Katz [Page 9]
-
- RFC 1377 PPP OSINLCP November 1992
-
-
- experience.
-
- Thanks also to Bill Simpson for his editing and formatting efforts,
- both for this document and for PPP in general.
-
- Security Considerations
-
- Security issues are not discussed in this memo.
-
- Chair's Address
-
- The working group can be contacted via the current chair:
-
- Brian Lloyd
- Lloyd & Associates
- 3420 Sudbury Road
- Cameron Park, California 95682
-
- Phone: (916) 676-1147
- EMail: brian@lloyd.com
-
- Author's Address
-
- Questions about this memo can also be directed to:
-
- Dave Katz
- cisco Systems, Inc.
- 1525 O'Brien Dr.
- Menlo Park, CA 94025
-
- Phone: (415) 688-8284
- EMail: dkatz@cisco.com
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Katz [Page 10]
-
-