home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Network Working Group M. Laubach
- Request for Comments: 1577 Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
- Category: Standards Track January 1994
-
-
- Classical IP and ARP over ATM
-
- 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
-
- This memo defines an initial application of classical IP and ARP in
- an Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) network environment configured as
- a Logical IP Subnetwork (LIS) as described in Section 3. This memo
- does not preclude the subsequent development of ATM technology into
- areas other than a LIS; specifically, as single ATM networks grow to
- replace many ethernet local LAN segments and as these networks become
- globally connected, the application of IP and ARP will be treated
- differently. This memo considers only the application of ATM as a
- direct replacement for the "wires" and local LAN segments connecting
- IP end-stations ("members") and routers operating in the "classical"
- LAN-based paradigm. Issues raised by MAC level bridging and LAN
- emulation are beyond the scope of this paper.
-
- This memo introduces general ATM technology and nomenclature.
- Readers are encouraged to review the ATM Forum and ITU-TS (formerly
- CCITT) references for more detailed information about ATM
- implementation agreements and standards.
-
- Acknowledgments
-
- This memo could not have come into being without the critical review
- from Jim Forster of Cisco Systems, Drew Perkins of FORE Systems, and
- Bryan Lyles, Steve Deering, and Berry Kercheval of XEROX PARC. The
- concepts and models presented in [1], written by Dave Piscitello and
- Joseph Lawrence, laid the structural groundwork for this work. ARP
- [3] written by Dave Plummer and Inverse ARP [12] written by Terry
- Bradley and Caralyn Brown are the foundation of ATMARP presented in
- this memo. This document could have not been completed without the
- expertise of the IP over ATM Working Group of the IETF and the ad hoc
- PVC committee at the Amsterdam IETF meeting.
-
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 1]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- 1. Conventions
-
- The following language conventions are used in the items of
- specification in this document:
-
- o MUST, SHALL, or MANDATORY -- the item is an absolute requirement
- of the specification.
-
- o SHOULD or RECOMMEND -- this item should generally be followed for
- all but exceptional circumstances.
-
- o MAY or OPTIONAL -- the item is truly optional and may be followed
- or ignored according to the needs of the implementor.
-
- 2. Introduction
-
- The goal of this specification is to allow compatible and
- interoperable implementations for transmitting IP datagrams and ATM
- Address Resolution Protocol (ATMARP) requests and replies over ATM
- Adaptation Layer 5 (AAL5)[2,6].
-
- Note: this memo defines only the operation of IP and address
- resolution over ATM, and is not meant to describe the operation of
- ATM networks. Any reference to virtual connections, permanent virtual
- connections, or switched virtual connections applies only to virtual
- channel connections used to support IP and address resolution over
- ATM, and thus are assumed to be using AAL5. This memo places no
- restrictions or requirements on virtual connections used for other
- purposes.
-
- Initial deployment of ATM provides a LAN segment replacement for:
-
- 1) Local area networks (e.g., Ethernets, Token Rings and FDDI).
-
- 2) Local-area backbones between existing (non-ATM) LANs.
-
- 3) Dedicated circuits or frame relay PVCs between IP routers.
-
- Note: In 1), local IP routers with one or more ATM interfaces will be
- able to connect islands of ATM networks. In 3), public or private
- ATM Wide Area networks will be used to connect IP routers, which in
- turn may or may not connect to local ATM networks. ATM WANs and LANs
- may be interconnected.
-
- Private ATM networks (local or wide area) will use the private ATM
- address structure specified in the ATM Forum UNI specification [9].
- This structure is modeled after the format of an OSI Network Service
- Access Point Address. A private ATM address uniquely identifies an
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 2]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- ATM endpoint. Public networks will use either the address structure
- specified in ITU-TS recommendation E.164 or the private network ATM
- address structure. An E.164 address uniquely identifies an interface
- to a public network.
-
- The characteristics and features of ATM networks are different than
- those found in LANs:
-
- o ATM provides a Virtual Connection (VC) switched environment. VC
- setup may be done on either a Permanent Virtual Connection (PVC)
- or dynamic Switched Virtual Connection (SVC) basis. SVC call
- management signalling is performed via implementations of the
- Q.93B protocol [7,9].
-
- o Data to be passed by a VC is segmented into 53 octet quantities
- called cells (5 octets of ATM header and 48 octets of data).
-
- o The function of mapping user Protocol Data Units (PDUs) into the
- information field of the ATM cell and vice versa is performed in
- the ATM Adaptation Layer (AAL). When a VC is created a specific
- AAL type is associated with the VC. There are four different AAL
- types, which are referred to individually as "AAL1", "AAL2",
- "AAL3/4", and "AAL5". (Note: this memo concerns itself with the
- mapping of IP and ATMARP over AAL5 only. The other AAL types are
- mentioned for introductory purposes only.) The AAL type is known
- by the VC end points via the call setup mechanism and is not
- carried in the ATM cell header. For PVCs the AAL type is
- administratively configured at the end points when the Connection
- (circuit) is set up. For SVCs, the AAL type is communicated
- along the VC path via Q.93B as part of call setup establishment
- and the end points use the signaled information for
- configuration. ATM switches generally do not care about the AAL
- type of VCs. The AAL5 format specifies a packet format with a
- maximum size of (64K - 1) octets of user data. Cells for an AAL5
- PDU are transmitted first to last, the last cell indicating the
- end of the PDU. ATM standards guarantee that on a given VC, cell
- ordering is preserved end-to-end. NOTE: AAL5 provides a non-
- assured data transfer service - it is up to higher-level
- protocols to provide retransmission.
-
- o ATM Forum signalling defines point-to-point and point-to-
- multipoint Connection setup [9]. Multipoint-to-multipoint VCs
- are not yet specified by ITU-TS or ATM Forum.
-
- o An ATM Forum ATM endpoint address is either encoded as an NSAP
- Address (NSAPA) or is an E.164 Public-UNI address [9]. In some
- cases, both an ATM endpoint address and an E.164 Public UNI
- address are needed by an ATMARP client to reach another host or
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 3]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- router. Since the use of ATM endpoint addresses and E.164 public
- UNI addresses by ATMARP are analogous to the use of Ethernet
- addresses, the notion of "hardware address" is extended to
- encompass ATM addresses in the context of ATMARP, even though ATM
- addresses need not have hardware significance. ATM Forum NSAPAs
- use the same basic format as U.S. GOSIP NSAPAs [11]. Note: ATM
- Forum addresses should not be construed as being U.S. GOSIP
- NSAPAs. They are not, the administration is different, which
- fields get filled out are different, etc.
-
- This memo describes the initial deployment of ATM within "classical"
- IP networks as a direct replacement for local area networks
- (ethernets) and for IP links which interconnect routers, either
- within or between administrative domains. The "classical" model here
- refers to the treatment of the ATM host adapter as a networking
- interface to the IP protocol stack operating in a LAN-based paradigm.
-
- Characteristics of the classical model are:
-
- o The same maximum transmission unit (MTU) size is used for all VCs
- in a LIS [2]. (Refer to Section 5.)
-
- o Default LLC/SNAP encapsulation of IP packets.
-
- o End-to-end IP routing architecture stays the same.
-
- o IP addresses are resolved to ATM addresses by use of an ATMARP
- service within the LIS - ATMARPs stay within the LIS. From a
- client's perspective, the ATMARP architecture stays faithful to
- the basic ARP model presented in [3].
-
- o One IP subnet is used for many hosts and routers. Each VC
- directly connects two IP members within the same LIS.
-
- Future memos will describe the operation of IP over ATM when ATM
- networks become globally deployed and interconnected.
-
- The deployment of ATM into the Internet community is just beginning
- and will take many years to complete. During the early part of this
- period, we expect deployment to follow traditional IP subnet
- boundaries for the following reasons:
-
- o Administrators and managers of IP subnetworks will tend to
- initially follow the same models as they currently have deployed.
- The mindset of the community will change slowly over time as ATM
- increases its coverage and builds its credibility.
-
-
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 4]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- o Policy administration practices rely on the security, access,
- routing, and filtering capability of IP Internet gateways: i.e.,
- firewalls. ATM will not be allowed to "back-door" around these
- mechanisms until ATM provides better management capability than
- the existing services and practices.
-
- o Standards for global IP over ATM will take some time to complete
- and deploy.
-
- This memo details the treatment of the classical model of IP and
- ATMARP over ATM. This memo does not preclude the subsequent treatment
- of ATM networks within the IP framework as ATM becomes globally
- deployed and interconnected; this will be the subject of future
- documents. This memo does not address issues related to transparent
- data link layer interoperability.
-
- 3. IP Subnetwork Configuration
-
- In the LIS scenario, each separate administrative entity configures
- its hosts and routers within a closed logical IP subnetwork. Each
- LIS operates and communicates independently of other LISs on the same
- ATM network. Hosts connected to ATM communicate directly to other
- hosts within the same LIS. Communication to hosts outside of the
- local LIS is provided via an IP router. This router is an ATM
- Endpoint attached to the ATM network that is configured as a member
- of one or more LISs. This configuration may result in a number of
- disjoint LISs operating over the same ATM network. Hosts of differing
- IP subnets MUST communicate via an intermediate IP router even though
- it may be possible to open a direct VC between the two IP members
- over the ATM network.
-
- The requirements for IP members (hosts, routers) operating in an ATM
- LIS configuration are:
-
- o All members have the same IP network/subnet number and address
- mask [8].
-
- o All members within a LIS are directly connected to the ATM
- network.
-
- o All members outside of the LIS are accessed via a router.
-
- o All members of a LIS MUST have a mechanism for resolving IP
- addresses to ATM addresses via ATMARP (based on [3]) and vice
- versa via InATMARP (based on [12]) when using SVCs. Refer to
- Section 6 "Address Resolution" in this memo.
-
-
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 5]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- o All members of a LIS MUST have a mechanism for resolving VCs to
- IP addresses via InATMARP (based on [12]) when using PVCs. Refer
- to Section 6 "Address Resolution" in this memo.
-
- o All members within a LIS MUST be able to communicate via ATM with
- all other members in the same LIS; i.e., the virtual Connection
- topology underlying the intercommunication among the members is
- fully meshed.
-
- The following list identifies a set of ATM specific parameters that
- MUST be implemented in each IP station connected to the ATM network:
-
- o ATM Hardware Address (atm$ha). The ATM address of the individual
- IP station.
-
- o ATMARP Request Address (atm$arp-req). atm$arp-req is the ATM
- address of an individual ATMARP server located within the LIS.
- In an SVC environment, ATMARP requests are sent to this address
- for the resolution of target protocol addresses to target ATM
- addresses. That server MUST have authoritative responsibility
- for resolving ATMARP requests of all IP members within the LIS.
- Note: if the LIS is operating with PVCs only, then this parameter
- may be set to null and the IP station is not required to send
- ATMARP requests to the ATMARP server.
-
- It is RECOMMENDED that routers providing LIS functionality over the
- ATM network also support the ability to interconnect multiple LISs.
- Routers that wish to provide interconnection of differing LISs MUST
- be able to support multiple sets of these parameters (one set for
- each connected LIS) and be able to associate each set of parameters
- to a specific IP network/ subnet number. In addition, it is
- RECOMMENDED that a router be able to provide this multiple LIS
- support with a single physical ATM interface that may have one or
- more individual ATM endpoint addresses. Note: this does not
- necessarily mean different End System Identifiers (ESIs) when NSAPAs
- are used. The last octet of an NSAPA is the NSAPA Selector (SEL)
- field which can be used to differentiate up to 256 different LISs for
- the same ESI. (Refer to Section 5.1.3.1, "Private Networks" in [9].)
-
- 4. Packet Format
-
- Implementations MUST support IEEE 802.2 LLC/SNAP encapsulation as
- described in [2]. LLC/SNAP encapsulation is the default packet
- format for IP datagrams.
-
- This memo recognizes that other encapsulation methods may be used
- however, in the absence of other knowledge or agreement, LLC/SNAP
- encapsulation is the default.
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 6]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- This memo recognizes the future deployment of end-to-end signalling
- within ATM that will allow negotiation of encapsulation method on a
- per-VC basis. Signalling negotiations are beyond the scope of this
- memo.
-
- 5. MTU Size
-
- The default MTU size for IP members operating over the ATM network
- SHALL be 9180 octets. The LLC/SNAP header is 8 octets, therefore the
- default ATM AAL5 protocol data unit size is 9188 octets [2]. In
- classical IP subnets, values other than the default can be used if
- and only if all members in the LIS have been configured to use the
- non-default value.
-
- This memo recognizes the future deployment of end-to-end signalling
- within ATM that will allow negotiation of MTU size on a per-VC basis.
- Signalling negotiations are beyond the scope of this document.
-
- 6. Address Resolution
-
- Address resolution within an ATM logical IP subnet SHALL make use of
- the ATM Address Resolution Protocol (ATMARP) (based on [3]) and the
- Inverse ATM Address Resolution Protocol (InATMARP) (based on [12]) as
- defined in this memo. ATMARP is the same protocol as the ARP
- protocol presented in [3] with extensions needed to support ARP in a
- unicast server ATM environment. InATMARP is the same protocol as the
- original InARP protocol presented in [12] but applied to ATM
- networks. All IP stations MUST support these protocols as updated
- and extended in this memo. Use of these protocols differs depending
- on whether PVCs or SVCs are used.
-
- 6.1 Permanent Virtual Connections
-
- An IP station MUST have a mechanism (eg. manual configuration) for
- determining what PVCs it has, and in particular which PVCs are being
- used with LLC/SNAP encapsulation. The details of the mechanism are
- beyond the scope of this memo.
-
- All IP members supporting PVCs are required to use the Inverse ATM
- Address Resolution Protocol (InATMARP) (refer to [12]) on those VCs
- using LLC/SNAP encapsulation. In a strict PVC environment, the
- receiver SHALL infer the relevant VC from the VC on which the
- InATMARP request (InARP_REQUEST) or response (InARP_REPLY) was
- received. When the ATM source and/or target address is unknown, the
- corresponding ATM address length in the InATMARP packet MUST be set
- to zero (0) indicating a null length, otherwise the appropriate
- address field should be filled in and the corresponding length set
- appropriately. InATMARP packet format details are presented later in
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 7]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- this memo.
-
- Directly from [12]: "When the requesting station receives the InARP
- reply, it may complete the [ATM]ARP table entry and use the provided
- address information. Note: as with [ATM]ARP, information learned via
- In[ATM]ARP may be aged or invalidated under certain circumstances."
- It is the responsibility of each IP station supporting PVCs to re-
- validate [ATM]ARP table entries as part of the aging process. See
- Section 6.5 on "ATMARP Table Aging".
-
- 6.2 Switched Virtual Connections
-
- SVCs require support for ATMARP in the non-broadcast, non-multicast
- environment that ATM networks currently provide. To meet this need a
- single ATMARP Server MUST be located within the LIS. This server MUST
- have authoritative responsibility for resolving the ATMARP requests
- of all IP members within the LIS.
-
- The server itself does not actively establish connections. It
- depends on the clients in the LIS to initiate the ATMARP registration
- procedure. An individual client connects to the ATMARP server using
- a point-to-point VC. The server, upon the completion of an ATM
- call/connection of a new VC specifying LLC/SNAP encapsulation, will
- transmit an InATMARP request to determine the IP address of the
- client. The InATMARP reply from the client contains the information
- necessary for the ATMARP Server to build its ATMARP table cache. This
- information is used to generate replies to the ATMARP requests it
- receives.
-
- The ATMARP Server mechanism requires that each client be
- administratively configured with the ATM address of the ATMARP Server
- atm$arp-req as defined earlier in this memo. There is to be one and
- only one ATMARP Server operational per logical IP subnet. It is
- RECOMMENDED that the ATMARP Server also be an IP station. This
- station MUST be administratively configured to operate and recognize
- itself as the ATMARP Server for a LIS. The ATMARP Server MUST be
- configured with an IP address for each logical IP subnet it is
- serving to support InATMARP requests.
-
- This memo recognizes that a single ATMARP Server is not as robust as
- multiple servers which synchronize their databases correctly. This
- document is defining the client-server interaction by using a simple,
- single server approach as a reference model, and does not prohibit
- more robust approaches which use the same client-server interface.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 8]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- 6.3 ATMARP Server Operational Requirements
-
- The ATMARP server accepts ATM calls/connections from other ATM end
- points. At call setup and if the VC supports LLC/SNAP encapsulation,
- the ATMARP server will transmit to the originating ATM station an
- InATMARP request (InARP_REQUEST) for each logical IP subnet the
- server is configured to serve. After receiving an InATMARP reply
- (InARP_REPLY), the server will examine the IP address and the ATM
- address. The server will add (or update) the <ATM address, IP
- address> map entry and timestamp into its ATMARP table. If the
- InATMARP IP address duplicates a table entry IP address and the
- InATMARP ATM address does not match the table entry ATM address and
- there is an open VC associated with that table entry, the InATMARP
- information is discarded and no modifications to the table are made.
- ATMARP table entries persist until aged or invalidated. VC call tear
- down does not remove ATMARP table entries.
-
- The ATMARP server, upon receiving an ATMARP request (ARP_REQUEST),
- will generate the corresponding ATMARP reply (ARP_REPLY) if it has an
- entry in its ATMARP table. Otherwise it will generate a negative
- ATMARP reply (ARP_NAK). The ARP_NAK response is an extension to the
- ARMARP protocol and is used to improve the robustness of the ATMARP
- server mechanism. With ARP_NAK, a client can determine the
- difference between a catastrophic server failure and an ATMARP table
- lookup failure. The ARP_NAK packet format is the same as the
- received ARP_REQUEST packet format with the operation code set to
- ARP_NAK, i.e., the ARP_REQUEST packet data is merely copied for
- transmission with the ARP_REQUEST operation code reset to ARP_NAK.
-
- Updating the ATMARP table information timeout, the short form: when
- the server receives an ATMARP request over a VC, where the source IP
- and ATM address match the association already in the ATMARP table and
- the ATM address matches that associated with the VC, the server may
- update the timeout on the source ATMARP table entry: i.e., if the
- client is sending ATMARP requests to the server over the same VC that
- it used to register its ATMARP entry, the server should examine the
- ATMARP requests and note that the client is still "alive" by updating
- the timeout on the client's ATMARP table entry.
-
- Adding robustness to the address resolution mechanism using ATMARP:
- when the server receives an ARP_REQUEST over a VC, it examines the
- source information. If there is no IP address associated with the VC
- over which the ATMARP request was received and if the source IP
- address is not associated with any other connection, then the server
- will add the <ATM address, IP address> entry and timestamp into its
- ATMARP table and associate the entry with this VC.
-
-
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 9]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- 6.4 ATMARP Client Operational Requirements
-
- The ATMARP client is responsible for contacting the ATMARP server to
- register its own ATMARP information and to gain and refresh its own
- ATMARP entry/information about other IP members. This means, as
- noted above, that ATMARP clients MUST be configured with the ATM
- address of the ATMARP server. ATMARP clients MUST:
-
- 1. Initiate the VC connection to the ATMARP server for
- transmitting and receiving ATMARP and InATMARP packets.
-
- 2. Respond to ARP_REQUEST and InARP_REQUEST packets received on
- any VC appropriately. (Refer to Section 7, "Protocol Operation"
- in [12].)
-
- 3. Generate and transmit ARP_REQUEST packets to the ATMARP server
- and to process ARP_REPLY and ARP_NAK packets from the server
- appropriately. ARP_REPLY packets should be used to
- build/refresh its own client ATMARP table entries.
-
- 4. Generate and transmit InARP_REQUEST packets as needed and to
- process InARP_REPLY packets appropriately. InARP_REPLY packets
- should be used to build/refresh its own client ATMARP table
- entries. (Refer to Section 7, "Protocol Operation" in [12].)
-
- 5. Provide an ATMARP table aging function to remove its own old
- client ATMARP tables entries after a convenient period of time.
-
- Note: if the client does not maintain an open VC to the server, the
- client MUST refresh its ATMARP information with the server at least
- once every 20 minutes. This is done by opening a VC to the server
- and exchanging the initial InATMARP packets.
-
- 6.5 ATMARP Table Aging
-
- An ATMARP client or server MUST have knowledge of any open VCs it has
- (permanent or switched), their association with an ATMARP table
- entry, and in particular, which VCs support LLC/SNAP encapsulation.
-
- Client ATMARP table entries are valid for a maximum time of 15
- minutes.
-
- Server ATMARP table entries are valid for a minimum time of 20
- minutes.
-
- Prior to aging an ATMARP table entry, an ATMARP server MUST generate
- an InARP_REQUEST on any open VC associated with that entry. If an
- InARP_REPLY is received, that table entry is updated and not deleted.
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 10]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- If there is no open VC associated with the table entry, the entry is
- deleted.
-
- When an ATMARP table entry ages, an ATMARP client MUST invalidate the
- table entry. If there is no open VC associated with the invalidated
- entry, that entry is deleted. In the case of an invalidated entry and
- an open VC, the ATMARP client must revalidate the entry prior to
- transmitting any non address resolution traffic on that VC. In the
- case of a PVC, the client validates the entry by transmitting an
- InARP_REQUEST and updating the entry on receipt of an InARP_REPLY. In
- the case of an SVC, the client validates the entry by transmitting an
- ARP_REQUEST to the ATMARP Server and updating the entry on receipt of
- an ARP_REPLY. If a VC with an associated invalidated ATMARP table
- entry is closed, that table entry is removed.
-
- 6.6 ATMARP and InATMARP Packet Format
-
- Internet addresses are assigned independently of ATM addresses. Each
- host implementation MUST know its own IP and ATM address(es) and MUST
- respond to address resolution requests appropriately. IP members
- MUST also use ATMARP and InATMARP to resolve IP addresses to ATM
- addresses when needed.
-
- The ATMARP and InATMARP protocols use the same hardware type
- (ar$hrd), protocol type (ar$pro), and operation code (ar$op) data
- formats as the ARP and InARP protocols [3,12]. The location of these
- fields within the ATMARP packet are in the same byte position as
- those in ARP and InARP packets. A unique hardware type value has
- been assigned for ATMARP. In addition, ATMARP makes use of an
- additional operation code for ARP_NAK. The remainder of the
- ATMARP/InATMARP packet format is different than the ARP/InARP packet
- format.
-
- The ATMARP and InATMARP protocols have several fields that have the
- following format and values:
-
- Data:
- ar$hrd 16 bits Hardware type
- ar$pro 16 bits Protocol type
- ar$shtl 8 bits Type & length of source ATM number (q)
- ar$sstl 8 bits Type & length of source ATM subaddress (r)
- ar$op 16 bits Operation code (request, reply, or NAK)
- ar$spln 8 bits Length of source protocol address (s)
- ar$thtl 8 bits Type & length of target ATM number (x)
- ar$tstl 8 bits Type & length of target ATM subaddress (y)
- ar$tpln 8 bits Length of target protocol address (z)
- ar$sha qoctets source ATM number
- ar$ssa roctets source ATM subaddress
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 11]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- ar$spa soctets source protocol address
- ar$tha xoctets target ATM number
- ar$tsa yoctets target ATM subaddress
- ar$tpa zoctets target protocol address
-
- Where:
-
- ar$hrd - assigned to ATM Forum address family and is
- 19 decimal (0x0013) [4].
-
- ar$pro - see Assigned Numbers for protocol type number for
- the protocol using ATMARP. (IP is 0x0800).
-
- ar$op - The operation type value (decimal):
- ARP_REQUEST = 1
- ARP_REPLY = 2
- InARP_REQUEST = 8
- InARP_REPLY = 9
- ARP_NAK = 10
-
- ar$spln - length in octets of the source protocol address. For
- IP ar$spln is 4.
-
- ar$tpln - length in octets of the target protocol address. For
- IP ar$tpln is 4.
-
- ar$sha - source ATM number (E.164 or ATM Forum NSAPA)
-
- ar$ssa - source ATM subaddress (ATM Forum NSAPA)
-
- ar$spa - source protocol address
-
- ar$tha - target ATM number (E.164 or ATM Forum NSAPA)
-
- ar$tsa - target ATM subaddress (ATM Forum NSAPA)
-
- ar$tpa - target protocol address
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 12]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- The encoding of the 8-bit type and length value for ar$shtl,
- ar$sstl, ar$thtl, and ar$tstl is as follows:
-
- MSB 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 LSB
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
- | 0 | 1/0 | Octet length of address |
- +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
-
- Where:
-
- bit.8 (reserved) = 0 (for future use)
-
- bit.7 (type) = 0 ATM Forum NSAPA format
- = 1 E.164 format
-
- bit.6-1 (length) = 6 bit unsigned octet length of address
- (MSB = bit.6, LSB = bit.1)
-
- ATM addresses in Q.93B (as defined by the ATM Forum UNI 3.0
- signalling specification [9]) include a "Calling Party Number
- Information Element" and a "Calling Party Subaddress Information
- Element". These Information Elements (IEs) SHOULD map to
- ATMARP/InATMARP source ATM number and source ATM subaddress
- respectively. Furthermore, ATM Forum defines a "Called Party Number
- Information Element" and a "Called Party Subaddress Information
- Element". These IEs map to ATMARP/InATMARP target ATM number and
- target ATM subaddress respectively.
-
- The ATM Forum defines three structures for the combined use of number
- and subaddress [9]:
-
- ATM Number ATM Subaddress
- -------------- --------------
- Structure 1 ATM Forum NSAPA null
- Structure 2 E.164 null
- Structure 3 E.164 ATM Forum NSAPA
-
- IP members MUST register their ATM endpoint address with their ATMARP
- server using the ATM address structure appropriate for their ATM
- network connection: i.e., LISs implemented over ATM LANs following
- ATM Forum UNI 3.0 should register using Structure 1; LISs implemented
- over an E.164 "public" ATM network should register using Structure 2.
- A LIS implemented over a combination of ATM LANs and public ATM
- networks may need to register using Structure 3. Implementations
- based on this memo MUST support all three ATM address structures.
-
- ATMARP and InATMARP requests and replies for ATM address structures 1
- and 2 MUST indicate a null ATM subaddress; i.e., ar$sstl.type = 1 and
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 13]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- ar$sstl.length = 0 and ar$tstl.type = 1 and ar$tstl.length = 0. When
- ar$sstl.length and ar$tstl.length =0, the ar$tsa and ar$ssa fields
- are not present.
-
- Note: the ATMARP packet format presented in this memo is general in
- nature in that the ATM number and ATM subaddress fields SHOULD map
- directly to the corresponding Q.93B fields used for ATM
- call/connection setup signalling messages. The IP over ATM Working
- Group expects ATM Forum NSAPA numbers (Structure 1) to predominate
- over E.164 numbers (Structure 2) as ATM endpoint identifiers within
- ATM LANs. The ATM Forum's VC Routing specification is not complete
- at this time and therefore its impact on the operational use of ATM
- Address Structure 3 is undefined. The ATM Forum will be defining this
- relationship in the future. It is for this reason that IP members
- need to support all three ATM address structures.
-
- 6.7 ATMARP/InATMARP Packet Encapsulation
-
- ATMARP and InATMARP packets are to be encoded in AAL5 PDUs using
- LLC/SNAP encapsulation. The format of the AAL5 CPCS-SDU payload field
- for ATMARP/InATMARP PDUs is:
-
- Payload Format for ATMARP/InATMARP PDUs:
- +------------------------------+
- | LLC 0xAA-AA-03 |
- +------------------------------+
- | OUI 0x00-00-00 |
- +------------------------------+
- | Ethertype 0x08-06 |
- +------------------------------+
- | |
- | ATMARP/InATMARP Packet |
- | |
- +------------------------------+
-
- The LLC value of 0xAA-AA-03 (3 octets) indicates the presence of a
- SNAP header.
-
- The OUI value of 0x00-00-00 (3 octets) indicates that the following
- two-bytes is an ethertype.
-
- The Ethertype value of 0x08-06 (2 octets) indicates ARP [4].
-
- The total size of the LLC/SNAP header is fixed at 8-octets. This
- aligns the start of the ATMARP packet on a 64-bit boundary relative
- to the start of the AAL5 CPCS-SDU.
-
-
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 14]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- The LLC/SNAP encapsulation for ATMARP/InATMARP presented here is
- consistent with the treatment of multiprotocol encapsulation of IP
- over ATM AAL5 as specified in [2] and in the format of ATMARP over
- IEEE 802 networks as specified in [5].
-
- Traditionally, address resolution requests are broadcast to all
- directly connected IP members within a LIS. It is conceivable in the
- future that larger scaled ATM networks may handle ATMARP requests to
- destinations outside the originating LIS, perhaps even globally;
- issues raised by ATMARP'ing outside the LIS or by a global ATMARP
- mechanism are beyond the scope of this memo.
-
- 7. IP Broadcast Address
-
- ATM does not support broadcast addressing, therefore there are no
- mappings available from IP broadcast addresses to ATM broadcast
- services. Note: this lack of mapping does not restrict members from
- transmitting or receiving IP datagrams specifying any of the four
- standard IP broadcast address forms as described in [8]. Members,
- upon receiving an IP broadcast or IP subnet broadcast for their LIS,
- MUST process the packet as if addressed to that station.
-
- 8. IP Multicast Address
-
- ATM does not support multicast address services, therefore there are
- no mappings available from IP multicast addresses to ATM multicast
- services. Current IP multicast implementations (i.e., MBONE and IP
- tunneling, see [10]) will continue to operate over ATM based logical
- IP subnets if operated in the WAN configuration.
-
- This memo recognizes the future development of ATM multicast service
- addressing by the ATM Forum. When available and widely implemented,
- the roll-over from the current IP multicast architecture to this new
- ATM architecture will be straightforward.
-
- 9. Security
-
- Not all of the security issues relating to IP over ATM are clearly
- understood at this time, due to the fluid state of ATM
- specifications, newness of the technology, and other factors.
-
- It is believed that ATM and IP facilities for authenticated call
- management, authenticated end-to-end communications, and data
- encryption will be needed in globally connected ATM networks. Such
- future security facilities and their use by IP networks are beyond
- the scope of this memo.
-
-
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 15]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- There are known security issues relating to host impersonation via
- the address resolution protocols used in the Internet [13]. No
- special security mechanisms have been added to the address resolution
- mechanism defined here for use with networks using IP over ATM.
-
- 10. Open Issues
-
- o Interim Local Management Interface (ILMI) services will not be
- generally implemented initially by some providers and vendors and
- will not be used to obtain the ATM address network prefix from
- the network [9]. Meta-signalling does provide some of this
- functionality and in the future we need to document the options.
-
- o Well known ATM address(es) for ATMARP servers? It would be very
- handy if a mechanism were available for determining the "well
- known" ATM address(es) for the client's ATMARP server in the LIS.
-
- o There are many VC management issues which have not yet been
- addressed by this specification and which await the unwary
- implementor. For example, one problem that has not yet been
- resolved is how two IP members decide which of duplicate VCs can
- be released without causing VC thrashing. If two IP stations
- simultaneously established VCs to each other, it is tempting to
- allow only one of these VCs to be established, or to release one
- of these VCs immediately after it is established. If both IP
- stations simultaneously decide to release opposite VCs, a
- thrashing effect can be created where VCs are repeatedly
- established and immediately released. For the time being, the
- safest strategy is to allow duplicate VCs to be established and
- simply age them like any other VCs.
-
- References
-
- [1] Piscitello, D., and J. Lawrence, "IP and ARP over the SMDS
- Service", RFC 1209, Bell Communications Research, March 1991.
-
- [2] Heinanen, J., "Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Adaptation
- Layer 5", RFC 1483, Telecom Finland, July 1993.
-
- [3] Plummer, D., "An Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol - or -
- Converting Network Addresses to 48.bit Ethernet Address for
- Transmission on Ethernet Hardware", STD 37, RFC 826, MIT,
- November 1982.
-
- [4] Reynolds, J., and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", STD 2, RFC 1340,
- USC/Information Sciences Institute, July 1992.
-
-
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 16]
-
- RFC 1577 Classical IP and ARP over ATM January 1993
-
-
- [5] Postel, J., and J. Reynolds, "A Standard for the Transmission of
- IP Datagrams over IEEE 802 Networks", STD 43, RFC 1042,
- USC/Information Sciences Institute, February 1988.
-
- [6] CCITT, "Draft Recommendation I.363", CCITT Study Group XVIII,
- Geneva, 19-29 January 1993.
-
- [7] CCITT, "Draft text for Q.93B", CCITT Study Group XI, 23 September
- - 2 October 1992.
-
- [8] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts -- Communication
- Layers", STD 3, RFC 1122, USC/Information Sciences Institute,
- October 1989.
-
- [9] ATM Forum, "ATM User-Network Interface Specification Version
- 3.0.", ATM Forum, 480 San Antonio Road, Suite 100, Mountain View,
- CA 94040, June 1993.
-
- [10] Deering, S., "Host Extensions for IP Multicasting", STD 5, RFC
- 1112, Stanford University, August 1989.
-
- [11] Colella, R., and Gardner, E., and R. Callon, "Guidelines for OSI
- NSAP Allocation in the Internet", RFC 1237, NIST, Mitre, DEC,
- July 1991.
-
- [12] Bradely, T., and C. Brown, "Inverse Address Resolution Protocol",
- RFC 1293, Wellfleet Communications, Inc., January 1992.
-
- [13] Bellovin, S., "Security Problems in the TCP/IP Protocol Suite",
- ACM Computer Communications Review, Vol. 19, Issue 2, pp. 32-48,
- 1989.
-
- Security Considerations
-
- Security issues are discussed in Section 9.
-
- Author's Address
-
- Mark Laubach
- Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
- 1501 Page Mill Road
- Palo Alto, CA 94304
-
- Phone: 415-857-3513
- Fax: 415-857-8526
- EMail: laubach@hpl.hp.com
-
-
-
-
-
- Laubach [Page 17]
-
-