home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Network Working Group J. Postel
- Request for Comments: 1042 J. Reynolds
- ISI
- Obsoletes: RFC-948 February 1988
-
-
-
- A Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams over IEEE 802 Networks
-
-
- Status of this Memo
-
- This RFC specifies a standard method of encapsulating the Internet
- Protocol (IP) [1] datagrams and Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) [2]
- requests and replies on IEEE 802 Networks. This RFC specifies a
- protocol standard for the Internet community. Distribution of this
- memo is unlimited.
-
- Acknowledgment
-
- This memo would not exist with out the very significant contributions
- of Drew Perkins of Carnegie Mellon University, Jacob Rekhter of the
- T.J. Watson Research Center, IBM Corporation, and Joseph Cimmino of
- the University of Maryland.
-
- Introduction
-
- The goal of this specification is to allow compatible and
- interoperable implementations for transmitting IP datagrams and ARP
- requests and replies. To achieve this it may be necessary in a few
- cases to limit the use that IP and ARP make of the capabilities of a
- particular IEEE 802 standard.
-
- The IEEE 802 specifications define a family of standards for Local
- Area Networks (LANs) that deal with the Physical and Data Link Layers
- as defined by the ISO Open System Interconnection Reference Model
- (ISO/OSI). Several Physical Layer standards (802.3, 802.4, and
- 802.5) [3,4,5] and one Data Link Layer Standard (802.2) [6] have been
- defined. The IEEE Physical Layer standards specify the ISO/OSI
- Physical Layer and the Media Access Control Sublayer of the ISO/OSI
- Data Link Layer. The 802.2 Data Link Layer standard specifies the
- Logical Link Control Sublayer of the ISO/OSI Data Link Layer.
-
- This memo describes the use of IP and ARP on the three types of
- networks. At this time, it is not necessary that the use of IP and
- ARP be consistent across all three types of networks, only that it be
- consistent within each type. This may change in the future as new
- IEEE 802 standards are defined and the existing standards are revised
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 1]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- allowing for interoperability at the Data Link Layer.
-
- It is the goal of this memo to specify enough about the use of IP and
- ARP on each type of network to ensure that:
-
- (1) all equipment using IP or ARP on 802.3 networks will
- interoperate,
-
- (2) all equipment using IP or ARP on 802.4 networks will
- interoperate,
-
- (3) all equipment using IP or ARP on 802.5 networks will
- interoperate.
-
- Of course, the goal of IP is interoperability between computers
- attached to different networks, when those networks are
- interconnected via an IP gateway [8]. The use of IEEE 802.1
- compatible Transparent Bridges to allow interoperability across
- different networks is not fully described pending completion of that
- standard.
-
- Description
-
- IEEE 802 networks may be used as IP networks of any class (A, B, or
- C). These systems use two Link Service Access Point (LSAP) fields of
- the LLC header in much the same way the ARPANET uses the "link"
- field. Further, there is an extension of the LLC header called the
- Sub-Network Access Protocol (SNAP).
-
- IP datagrams are sent on IEEE 802 networks encapsulated within the
- 802.2 LLC and SNAP data link layers, and the 802.3, 802.4, or 802.5
- physical networks layers. The SNAP is used with an Organization Code
- indicating that the following 16 bits specify the EtherType code (as
- listed in Assigned Numbers [7]).
-
- Normally, all communication is performed using 802.2 type 1
- communication. Consenting systems on the same IEEE 802 network may
- use 802.2 type 2 communication after verifying that it is supported
- by both nodes. This is accomplished using the 802.2 XID mechanism.
- However, type 1 communication is the recommended method at this time
- and must be supported by all implementations. The rest of this
- specification assumes the use of type 1 communication.
-
- The IEEE 802 networks may have 16-bit or 48-bit physical addresses.
- This specification allows the use of either size of address within a
- given IEEE 802 network.
-
- Note that the 802.3 standard specifies a transmission rate of from 1
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 2]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- to 20 megabit/second, the 802.4 standard specifies 1, 5, and 10
- megabit/second, and the 802.5 standard specifies 1 and 4
- megabit/second. The typical transmission rates used are 10
- megabit/second for 802.3, 10 megabit/second for 802.4, and 4
- megabit/second for 802.5. However, this specification for the
- transmission of IP Datagrams does not depend on the transmission
- rate.
-
- Header Format
- Header
-
- ...--------+--------+--------+
- MAC Header | 802.{3/4/5} MAC
- ...--------+--------+--------+
-
- +--------+--------+--------+
- | DSAP=K1| SSAP=K1| Control| 802.2 LLC
- +--------+--------+--------+
-
- +--------+--------+---------+--------+--------+
- |Protocol Id or Org Code =K2| EtherType | 802.2 SNAP
- +--------+--------+---------+--------+--------+
-
- The total length of the LLC Header and the SNAP header is 8-octets,
- making the 802.2 protocol overhead come out on an nice boundary.
-
- The K1 value is 170 (decimal).
-
- The K2 value is 0 (zero).
-
- The control value is 3 (Unnumbered Information).
-
- Address Mappings
-
- The mapping of 32-bit Internet addresses to 16-bit or 48-bit IEEE 802
- addresses must be done via the dynamic discovery procedure of the
- Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) [2].
-
- Internet addresses are assigned arbitrarily on Internet networks.
- Each host's implementation must know its own Internet address and
- respond to Address Resolution requests appropriately. It must also
- use ARP to translate Internet addresses to IEEE 802 addresses when
- needed.
-
- The ARP Details
-
- The ARP protocol has several fields that parameterize its use in
- any specific context [2]. These fields are:
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 3]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- hrd 16 - bits The Hardware Type Code
- pro 16 - bits The Protocol Type Code
- hln 8 - bits Octets in each hardware address
- pln 8 - bits Octets in each protocol address
- op 16 - bits Operation Code
-
- The hardware type code assigned for the IEEE 802 networks (of all
- kinds) is 6 (see [7] page 16).
-
- The protocol type code for IP is 2048 (see [7] page 14).
-
- The hardware address length is 2 for 16-bit IEEE 802 addresses, or
- 6 for 48-bit IEEE 802 addresses.
-
- The protocol address length (for IP) is 4.
-
- The operation code is 1 for request and 2 for reply.
-
- Broadcast Address
-
- The broadcast Internet address (the address on that network with a
- host part of all binary ones) should be mapped to the broadcast IEEE
- 802 address (of all binary ones) (see [8] page 14).
-
- Trailer Formats
-
- Some versions of Unix 4.x bsd use a different encapsulation method in
- order to get better network performance with the VAX virtual memory
- architecture. Consenting systems on the same IEEE 802 network may
- use this format between themselves. Details of the trailer
- encapsulation method may be found in [9]. However, all hosts must be
- able to communicate using the standard (non-trailer) method.
-
- Byte Order
-
- As described in Appendix B of the Internet Protocol specification
- [1], the IP datagram is transmitted over IEEE 802 networks as a
- series of 8-bit bytes. This byte transmission order has been called
- "big-endian" [11].
-
- Maximum Transmission Unit
-
- The Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) differs on the different types of
- IEEE 802 networks. In the following there are comments on the MTU
- for each type of IEEE 802 network. However, on any particular
- network all hosts must use the same MTU. In the following, the terms
- "maximum packet size" and "maximum transmission unit" are equivalent.
-
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 4]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- Frame Format and MAC Level Issues
-
- For all hardware types
-
- IP datagrams and ARP requests and replies are transmitted in
- standard 802.2 LLC Type 1 Unnumbered Information format, control
- code 3, with the DSAP and the SSAP fields of the 802.2 header set
- to 170, the assigned global SAP value for SNAP [6]. The 24-bit
- Organization Code in the SNAP is zero, and the remaining 16 bits
- are the EtherType from Assigned Numbers [7] (IP = 2048, ARP =
- 2054).
-
- IEEE 802 packets may have a minimum size restriction. When
- necessary, the data field should be padded (with octets of zero)
- to meet the IEEE 802 minimum frame size requirements. This
- padding is not part of the IP datagram and is not included in the
- total length field of the IP header.
-
- For compatibility (and common sense) the minimum packet size used
- with IP datagrams is 28 octets, which is 20 (minimum IP header) +
- 8 (LLC+SNAP header) = 28 octets (not including the MAC header).
-
- The minimum packet size used with ARP is 24 octets, which is 20
- (ARP with 2 octet hardware addresses and 4 octet protocol
- addresses) + 8 (LLC+SNAP header) = 24 octets (not including the
- MAC header).
-
- In typical situations, the packet size used with ARP is 32 octets,
- which is 28 (ARP with 6 octet hardware addresses and 4 octet
- protocol addresses) + 8 (LLC+SNAP header) = 32 octets (not
- including the MAC header).
-
- IEEE 802 packets may have a maximum size restriction.
- Implementations are encouraged to support full-length packets.
-
- For compatibility purposes, the maximum packet size used with IP
- datagrams or ARP requests and replies must be consistent on a
- particular network.
-
- Gateway implementations must be prepared to accept full-length
- packets and fragment them when necessary.
-
- Host implementations should be prepared to accept full-length
- packets, however hosts must not send datagrams longer than 576
- octets unless they have explicit knowledge that the destination is
- prepared to accept them. A host may communicate its size
- preference in TCP based applications via the TCP Maximum Segment
- Size option [10].
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 5]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- Datagrams on IEEE 802 networks may be longer than the general
- Internet default maximum packet size of 576 octets. Hosts
- connected to an IEEE 802 network should keep this in mind when
- sending datagrams to hosts not on the same IEEE 802 network. It
- may be appropriate to send smaller datagrams to avoid unnecessary
- fragmentation at intermediate gateways. Please see [10] for
- further information.
-
- IEEE 802.2 Details
-
- While not necessary for supporting IP and ARP, all
- implementations are required to support IEEE 802.2 standard
- Class I service. This requires supporting Unnumbered
- Information (UI) Commands, eXchange IDentification (XID)
- Commands and Responses, and TEST link (TEST) Commands and
- Responses.
-
- When either an XID or a TEST command is received a response
- must be returned; with the Destination and Source addresses,
- and the DSAP and SSAP swapped.
-
- When responding to an XID or a TEST command the sense of the
- poll/final bit must be preserved. That is, a command received
- with the poll/final bit reset must have the response returned
- with the poll/final bit reset and vice versa.
-
- The XID command or response has an LLC control field value of
- 175 (decimal) if poll is off or 191 (decimal) if poll is on.
- (See Appendix on Numbers.)
-
- The TEST command or response has an LLC control field value of
- 227 (decimal) if poll is off or 243 (decimal) if poll is on.
- (See Appendix on Numbers.)
-
- A command frame is identified with high order bit of the SSAP
- address reset. Response frames have high order bit of the SSAP
- address set to one.
-
- XID response frames should include an 802.2 XID Information
- field of 129.1.0 indicating Class I (connectionless) service.
- (type 1).
-
- TEST response frames should echo the information field received
- in the corresponding TEST command frame.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 6]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- For IEEE 802.3
-
- A particular implementation of an IEEE 802.3 Physical Layer is
- denoted using a three field notation. The three fields are data
- rate in megabit/second, medium type, and maximum segment length in
- hundreds of meters. One combination of of 802.3 parameters is
- 10BASE5 which specifies a 10 megabit/second transmission rate,
- baseband medium, and 500 meter segments. This correspondes to the
- specifications of the familiar "Ethernet" network.
-
- The MAC header contains 6 (2) octets of source address, 6 (2)
- octets of destination address, and 2 octets of length. The MAC
- trailer contains 4 octets of Frame Check Sequence (FCS), for a
- total of 18 (10) octets.
-
- IEEE 802.3 networks have a minimum packet size that depends on the
- transmission rate. For type 10BASE5 802.3 networks the minimum
- packet size is 64 octets.
-
- IEEE 802.3 networks have a maximum packet size which depends on
- the transmission rate. For type 10BASE5 802.3 networks the
- maximum packet size is 1518 octets including all octets between
- the destination address and the FCS inclusive.
-
- This allows 1518 - 18 (MAC header+trailer) - 8 (LLC+SNAP header) =
- 1492 for the IP datagram (including the IP header). Note that
- 1492 is not equal to 1500 which is the MTU for Ethernet networks.
-
- For IEEE 802.4
-
- The MAC header contains 1 octet of frame control, 6 (2) octets of
- source address, and 6 (2) octets of destination address. The MAC
- trailer contains 4 octets of Frame Check Sequence (FCS), for a
- total of 17 (9) octets.
-
- IEEE 802.4 networks have no minimum packet size.
-
- IEEE 802.4 networks have a maximum packet size of 8191 octets
- including all octets between the frame control and the FCS
- inclusive.
-
- This allows 8191 - 17 (MAC header+trailer) - 8 (LLC+SNAP header) =
- 8166 for the IP datagram (including the IP header).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 7]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- For IEEE 802.5
-
- The current standard for token ring's, IEEE 802.5-1985, specifies
- the operation of single ring networks. However, most
- implementations of 802.5 have added extensions for multi-ring
- networks using source-routing of packets at the MAC layer. There
- is now a Draft Addendum to IEEE 802.5, "Enhancement for Multi-Ring
- Networks" which attempts to standardize these extensions.
- Unfortunately, the most recent draft (November 10, 1987) is still
- rapidly evolving. More importantly, it differs significantly from
- the existing implementations. Therefore, the existing
- implementations of 802.5 [13] are described but no attempt is made
- to specify any future standard.
-
- The MAC header contains 1 octet of access control, 1 octet of
- frame control, 6 (2) octets of source address, 6 (2) octets of
- destination address, and (for multi-ring networks) 0 to 18 octets
- of Routing Information Field (RIF). The MAC trailer contains 4
- octets of FCS, for a total of 18 (10) to 36 (28) octets. There is
- one additional octet of frame status after the FCS.
-
- Multi-Ring Extension Details
-
- The presence of a Routing Information Field is indicated by the
- Most Significant Bit (MSB) of the source address, called the
- Routing Information Indicator (RII). If the RII equals zero, a
- RIF is not present. If the RII equals 1, the RIF is present.
- Although the RII is indicated in the source address, it is not
- part of a stations MAC layer address. In particular, the MSB
- of a destination address is the individual/group address
- indicator, and if set will cause such frames to be interpreted
- as multicasts. Implementations should be careful to reset the
- RII to zero before passing source addresses to other protocol
- layers which may be confused by their presence.
-
- The RIF consists of a two-octet Routing Control (RC) field
- followed by 0 to 8 two-octet Route-Designator (RD) fields. The
- RC for all-routes broadcast frames is formatted as follows:
-
- 0 1
- 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
- | B | LTH |D| LF | r |
- +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
-
- Note that each tick mark represents one bit position.
-
-
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 8]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- B - Broadcast Indicators: 3 bits
-
- The Broadcast Indicators are used to indicate the routing
- desired for a particular frame. A frame may be routed
- through a single specified route, through every distinct
- non-repeating route in a multi-ring network, or through a
- single route determined by a spanning tree algorithm such
- that the frame appears on every ring exactly once. The
- values which may be used at this time are (in binary):
-
- 000 - Non-broadcast (specific route)
- 100 - All-routes broadcast (global broadcast)
- 110 - Single-route broadcast (limited broadcast)
-
- All other values are reserved for future use.
-
- LTH - Length: 5 bits
-
- The Length bits are used to indicate the length or the RI
- field, including the RC and RD fields. Only even values
- between 2 and 30 inclusive are allowed.
-
- D - Direction Bit: 1 bit
-
- The D bit specifies the order of the RD fields. If D
- equals 1, the routing-designator fields are specified in
- reverse order.
-
- LF - Largest Frame: 3 bits
-
- The LF bits specify the maximum MTU supported by all
- bridges along a specific route. All multi-ring broadcast
- frames should be transmitted with a value at least as
- large as the supported MTU. The values used are:
-
- LF (binary) MAC MTU IP MTU
-
- 000 552 508
- 001 1064 1020
- 010 2088 2044
- 011 4136 4092
- 100 8232 8188
-
- All other values are reserved for future use.
-
- The receiver should compare the LF received with the MTU.
- If the LF is greater than or equal to the MTU then no
- action is taken; however, if the LF is less than the MTU
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 9]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- the frame is rejected.
-
- There are actually three possible actions if LF < MTU.
- First is the one required for this specification
- (reject the frame). Second is to reduce the MTU for
- all hosts to equal the LF. And, third is to keep a
- separate MTU per communicating host based on the
- received LFs.
-
- r - reserved: 4 bits
-
- These bits are reserved for future use and must be set to
- 0 by the transmitter and ignored by the receiver.
-
- It is not necessary for an implementation to interpret
- routing-designators. Their format is left unspecified.
- Routing-designators should be transmitted exactly as received.
-
- IEEE 802.5 networks have no minimum packet size.
-
- IEEE 802.5 networks have a maximum packet size based on the
- maximum time a node may hold the token. This time depends on many
- factors including the data signalling rate and the number of nodes
- on the ring. The determination of maximum packet size becomes
- even more complex when multi-ring networks with bridges are
- considered.
-
- Given a token-holding time of 9 milliseconds and a 4
- megabit/second ring, the maximum packet size possible is 4508
- octets including all octets between the access control and the FCS
- inclusive.
-
- This allows 4508 - 36 (MAC header+trailer with 18 octet RIF) - 8
- (LLC+SNAP header) = 4464 for the IP datagram (including the IP
- header).
-
- However, some current implementations are known to limit packets
- to 2046 octets (allowing 2002 octets for IP). It is recommended
- that all implementations support IP packets of at least 2002
- octets.
-
- By convention, source routing bridges used in multi-ring 802.5
- networks will not support packets larger than 8232 octets. With a
- MAC header+trailer of 36 octets and the LLC+SNAP header of 8
- octets, the IP datagram (including IP header) may not exceed 8188
- octets.
-
- A source routing bridge linking two rings may be configured to
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 10]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- limit the size of packets forwarded to 552 octets, with a MAC
- header+trailer of 36 octets and the LLC+SNAP of 8 octets, the IP
- datagram (including the IP header) may be limited to 508 octets.
- This is less that the default IP MTU of 576 octets, and may cause
- significant performance problems due to excessive datagram
- fragmentation. An implementation is not required to support an
- MTU of less than 576 octets, although it is suggest that the MTU
- be a user-configurable parameter to allow for it.
-
- IEEE 802.5 networks support three different types of broadcasts.
- All-Stations broadcasts are sent with no RIF or with the Broadcast
- Indicators set to 0 and no Routing Designators, and are copied
- once by all stations on the local ring. All-Routes broadcasts are
- sent with the corresponding Broadcast Indicators and result in
- multiple copies equal to the number of distinct non-repeating
- routes a packet may follow to a particular ring. Single-Route
- broadcasts result in exactly one copy of a frame being received by
- all stations on the multi-ring network.
-
- The dynamic address discovery procedure is to broadcast an ARP
- request. To limit the number of all rings broadcasts to a
- minimum, it is desirable (though not required) that an ARP request
- first be sent as an all-stations broadcast, without a Routing
- Information Field (RIF). If the all-stations (local ring)
- broadcast is not supported or if the all-stations broadcast is
- unsuccessful after some reasonable time has elapsed, then send the
- ARP request as an all-routes or single-route broadcast with an
- empty RIF (no routing designators). An all-routes broadcast is
- preferable since it yields an amount of fault tolerance. In an
- environment with multiple redundant bridges, all-routes broadcast
- allows operation in spite of spanning-tree bridge failures.
- However, single-route broadcasts may be used if IP and ARP must
- use the same broadcast method.
-
- When an ARP request or reply is received, all implementations are
- required to understand frames with no RIF (local ring) and frames
- with an empty RIF (also from the local ring). If the
- implementation supports multi-ring source routing, then a non-
- empty RIF is stored for future transmissions to the host
- originating the ARP request or reply. If source routing is not
- supported them all packets with non-empty RIFs should be
- gracefully ignored. This policy will allow all implementations in
- a single ring environment, to interoperate, whether or not they
- support the multi-ring extensions.
-
- It is possible that when sending an ARP request via an all-routes
- broadcast that multiple copies of the request will arrive at the
- destination as a result of the request being forwarded by several
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 11]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- bridges. However, these "copies" will have taken different routes
- so the contents of the RIF will differ. An implementation of ARP
- in this context must determine which of these "copies" to use and
- to ignore the others. There are three obvious and legal
- strategies: (1) take the first and ignore the rest (that is, once
- you have an entry in the ARP cache don't change it), (2) take the
- last, (that is, always up date the ARP cache with the latest ARP
- message), or (3) take the one with the shortest path, (that is,
- replace the ARP cache information with the latest ARP message data
- if it is a shorter route). Since there is no problem of
- incompatibility for interworking of different implementations if
- different strategies are chosen, the choice is up to each
- implementor. The recipient of the ARP request must send an ARP
- reply as a point to point message using the RIF information.
-
- The RIF information should be kept distinct from the ARP table.
- That is, there is, in principle, the ARP table to map from IP
- addresses to 802 48-bit addresses, and the RIF table to map from
- those to 802.5 source routes, if necessary. In practical
- implementations it may be convenient to store the ARP and RIF
- information together.
-
- Storing the information together may speed up access to the
- information when it is used. On the other hand, in a
- generalized implementation for all types of 802 networks a
- significant amount of memory might be wasted in an ARP cache if
- space for the RIF information were always reserved.
-
- IP broadcasts (datagrams with a IP broadcast address) must be sent
- as 802.5 single-route broadcasts. Unlike ARP, all-routes
- broadcasts are not desirable for IP. Receiving multiple copies of
- IP broadcasts would have undesirable effects on many protocols
- using IP. As with ARP, when an IP packet is received, all
- implementations are required to understand frames with no RIF and
- frames with an empty RIF.
-
- Since current interface hardware allows only one group address,
- and since the functional addresses are not globally unique, IP and
- ARP do not use either of these features. Further, in the IBM
- style 802.5 networks there are only 31 functional addresses
- available for user definition.
-
- IP precedence should not be mapped to 802.5 priority. All IP and
- ARP packets should be sent at the default 802.5 priority. The
- default priority is 3.
-
- After packet transmission, 802.5 provides frame not copied and
- address not recognized indicators. Implementations may use these
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 12]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- indicators to provide some amount of error detection and
- correction. If the frame not copied bit is set but the address
- not recognized bit is reset, receiver congestion has occurred. It
- is suggested, though not required, that hosts should retransmit
- the offending packet a small number of times (4) or until
- congestion no longer occurs. If the address not recognized bit is
- set, an implementation has 3 options: (1) ignore the error and
- throw the packet away, (2) return an ICMP destination unreachable
- message to the source, or (3) delete the ARP entry which was used
- to send this packet and send a new ARP request to the destination
- address. The latter option is the preferred approach since it
- will allow graceful recovery from first hop bridge and router
- failures and changed hardware addresses.
-
- Interoperation with Ethernet
-
- It is possible to use the Ethernet link level protocol [12] on the
- same physical cable with the IEEE 802.3 link level protocol. A
- computer interfaced to a physical cable used in this way could
- potentially read both Ethernet and 802.3 packets from the network.
- If a computer does read both types of packets, it must keep track of
- which link protocol was used with each other computer on the network
- and use the proper link protocol when sending packets.
-
- One should note that in such an environment, link level broadcast
- packets will not reach all the computers attached to the network, but
- only those using the link level protocol used for the broadcast.
-
- Since it must be assumed that most computers will read and send using
- only one type of link protocol, it is recommended that if such an
- environment (a network with both link protocols) is necessary, an IP
- gateway be used as if there were two distinct networks.
-
- Note that the MTU for the Ethernet allows a 1500 octet IP datagram,
- with the MTU for the 802.3 network allows only a 1492 octet IP
- datagram.
-
-
- Appendix on Numbers
-
- The IEEE likes to specify numbers in bit transmission order, or bit-
- wise little-endian order. The Internet protocols are documented in
- byte-wise big-endian order. This may cause some confusion about the
- proper values to use for numbers. Here are the conversions for some
- numbers of interest.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 13]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- Number IEEE IEEE Internet Internet
- HEX Binary Binary Decimal
-
- UI Op Code C0 11000000 00000011 3
- SAP for SNAP 55 01010101 10101010 170
- XID F5 11110101 10101111 175
- XID FD 11111101 10111111 191
- TEST C7 11000111 11100011 227
- TEST CF 11001111 11110011 243
- Info 818000 129.1.0
-
- References
-
- [1] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", RFC-791, USC/Information
- Sciences Institute, September 1981.
-
- [2] Plummer, D., "An Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol - or -
- Converting Network Protocol Addresses to 48.bit Ethernet
- Address for Transmission on Ethernet Hardware", RFC-826, MIT,
- November 1982.
-
- [3] IEEE, "IEEE Standards for Local Area Networks: Carrier Sense
- Multiple Access with Collision Detection (CSMA/CD) Access
- Method and Physical Layer Specifications", IEEE, New York, New
- York, 1985.
-
- [4] IEEE, "IEEE Standards for Local Area Networks: Token-Passing
- Bus Access Method and Physical Layer Specification", IEEE, New
- York, New York, 1985.
-
- [5] IEEE, "IEEE Standards for Local Area Networks: Token Ring
- Access Method and Physical Layer Specifications", IEEE, New
- York, New York, 1985.
-
- [6] IEEE, "IEEE Standards for Local Area Networks: Logical Link
- Control", IEEE, New York, New York, 1985.
-
- [7] Reynolds, J.K., and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", RFC-1010,
- USC/Information Sciences Institute, May 1987.
-
- [8] Braden, R., and J. Postel, "Requirements for Internet
- Gateways", RFC-1009, USC/Information Sciences Institute, June
- 1987.
-
- [9] Leffler, S., and M. Karels, "Trailer Encapsulations", RFC-893,
- University of California at Berkeley, April 1984.
-
- [10] Postel, J., "The TCP Maximum Segment Size Option and Related
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 14]
-
- RFC 1042 IP and ARP on IEEE 802 Networks February 1988
-
-
- Topics", RFC-879, USC/Information Sciences Institute, November
- 1983.
-
- [11] Cohen, D., "On Holy Wars and a Plea for Peace", Computer, IEEE,
- October 1981.
-
- [12] D-I-X, "The Ethernet - A Local Area Network: Data Link Layer
- and Physical Layer Specifications", Digital, Intel, and Xerox,
- November 1982.
-
- [13] IBM, "Token-Ring Network Architecture Reference", Second
- Edition, SC30-3374-01, August 1987.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Postel & Reynolds [Page 15]
-