home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
-
-
-
-
- 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]
-
-