home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Network Working Group W. Behl
- Request for Comments: 1538 McDATA Corporation
- Category: Informational B. Sterling
- McDATA Corporation
- W. Teskey
- I/O Concepts
- October 1993
-
-
- Advanced SNA/IP : A Simple SNA Transport Protocol
-
- Status of this Memo
-
- This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does
- not specify an Internet standard. Distribution of this memo is
- unlimited.
-
- Abstract
-
- This RFC provides information for the Internet community about a
- method for establishing and maintaining SNA sessions over an IP
- internet. While the issues discussed may not be directly relevant to
- the research problems of the Internet, they may be interesting to a
- number of researchers and implementors. Any questions or comments
- relative to the contents of this RFC may be sent to the following
- Internet address: snaip@mcdata.com.
-
- Table of Contents
-
- 1. Introduction.................................................. 2
- 2. Motivation and Rationale...................................... 2
- 3. SNA/IP Protocol Specification................................. 3
- 3.1 Glossary..................................................... 3
- 3.2 Conventions and Assumptions.................................. 3
- 3.3 The Protocol................................................. 3
- 3.3.1 Connection Establishment................................... 3
- 3.3.2 Data Transfer.............................................. 5
- 3.3.3 Connection Termination and Loss............................ 6
- 3.3.4 Session Data Flow.......................................... 7
- 3.3.5 State Transition Table for the Initiating Node............. 8
- 4. LLC to SNA/IP Conversion...................................... 8
- 5. Performance................................................... 8
- 6. VTAM Definition............................................... 9
- 7. Acknowledgments............................................... 9
- 8. References.................................................... 9
- 9. Security Considerations....................................... 10
- 10. Authors' Addresses........................................... 10
- 11. Disclaimer................................................... 10
-
-
-
- Behl, Sterling & Teskey [Page 1]
-
- RFC 1538 Advanced SNA/IP October 1993
-
-
- 1. Introduction
-
- Advanced SNA/IP suggests a method for the transmission of SNA session
- data over an IP network. This memo documents the SNA/IP protocol as
- implemented in the McDATA LinkMaster(R) 6200 Network Gateway, McDATA
- LinkMaster(R) 7100 Network Controller, and I/O Concepts X-Direct
- TN3270 Server.
-
- Advanced SNA/IP differs from other protocols designed to enable
- routing of SNA session traffic over an IP network. SNA/IP was
- originally designed for implementation in peripheral network nodes
- like SNA gateways and downstream nodes (DSNs). It is the authors'
- view, however, that SNA/IP could also be implemented in intermediate
- network nodes like routers as the base for an LLC to IP subnet
- gateway or data link switch function.
-
- 2. Motivation and Rationale
-
- The token-ring media access control (MAC) protocol 802.5 and logical
- link control (LLC) protocol 802.2 were the first set of LAN protocols
- used to provide a reliable and connection-oriented data link service
- for SNA sessions in a LAN environment.
-
- McDATA's experience with transporting SNA over 802.5 networks led to
- an 802.3/802.2 (Ethernet) based variation. As prospective customers
- were introduced to these Ethernet products, the question of
- routability arose. Network administrators, accustomed to working
- with Ethernet networks and the IP-based protocols, required an IP
- routable solution. McDATA's "SNA over Ethernet" products were
- bridgeable, but were not routable.
-
- SNA sessions require a reliable and connection-oriented data link.
- TCP running over IP provides a reliable and connection-oriented
- transport service and has the added benefit of being routable. It
- seemed the UDP and TCP protocols could be used in place of 802.2 Type
- I and Type II levels of service used in traditional SNA token-ring
- implementations. Advanced SNA/IP was created as a result of these
- observations.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Behl, Sterling & Teskey [Page 2]
-
- RFC 1538 Advanced SNA/IP October 1993
-
-
- 3. SNA/IP Protocol Specification
-
- 3.1. Glossary
-
- Data Link Switching (DLSw) - This is best described as a routing
- protocol used for the conversion of LLC-based SNA sessions to an IP
- form. The initial version of the DLSw protocol is documented in the
- informational RFC 1434 [1].
-
- Downstream Node (DSN) - An SNA Physical Unit (PU) type 2.0 or 2.1
- device connected to the SNA network via a LAN (802.5, 802.3, etc.) as
- opposed to an SDLC, X.25, or channel connection.
-
- SNA Gateway - A device that provides a data link control (DLC)
- conversion function for SNA PU type 5 (host) devices and LAN-
- attached DSNs.
-
- Subnet SNA Gateway - A device connected to both a traditional SNA
- token-ring segment and an IP network that performs local termination
- of the LLC connections, a mapping function of source address to
- destination IP address, and a conversion (switching) function of LLC
- to IP.
-
- 3.2. Conventions and Assumptions
-
- Frame formats are shown starting with the IP header. Other headers
- will, of course, appear in the actual frames sent, but these headers,
- and the numbers of them, will vary across MAC types.
-
- It is assumed the reader is familiar with both the standard SNA
- protocol (to the extent it applies to SNA Gateway and DSN functions)
- and the base set of TCP/IP protocols. Where practical, the reader is
- asked to refer to appropriate SNA and TCP/IP documentation.
-
- 3.3. The Protocol
-
- Conceptually, there are three phases to the Advanced SNA/IP protocol:
- the Connection Establishment phase, the Data Transfer phase, and the
- Connection Termination phase.
-
- 3.3.1. Connection Establishment
-
- Connection Establishment involves the exchange of logical XID packets
- between the connecting end nodes and culminates in the establishment
- of a TCP connection. This process is similar to the IBM-specified
- Test, XID, SABME and UA exchange used to establish a Type II 802.2
- connection for SNA traffic [2]. In place of the 802.2 Type I
- messages, SNA/IP defines the following set of UDP datagrams:
-
-
-
- Behl, Sterling & Teskey [Page 3]
-
- RFC 1538 Advanced SNA/IP October 1993
-
-
- Logical Null XID
-
- Use: Sent by an initiating node (such as a DSN) when the
- connection to another SNA node is desired.
-
- The Logical Null XID communicates the sending node's
- desire to negotiate connection parameters. Once those
- parameters are established, the Logical Null XID
- communicates the sender's TCP port to which a connection
- is to be made.
-
- Format:
-
- ------------------------------------
- | IP Header | UDP Header | 0xBF |
- ------------------------------------
-
- Source IP address: The IP address of the initiating
- node.
- Destination IP address: The IP address of the partner SNA
- node.
- Source UDP Port: Must match the TCP port number to be
- used in the eventual TCP connection.
- Destination UDP Port: A known port on the partner node
- that expects SNA/IP datagrams.
-
-
- XID Request
-
- Use: Sent in response to a Logical Null XID and requests the
- receiving node to send a Logical SNA XID datagram.
-
- Format:
-
- ------------------------------------
- | IP Header | UDP Header | 0xBF |
- ------------------------------------
-
- The source and destination IP and UDP port numbers follow,
- logically, from those provided in the Logical Null XID
- datagram.
-
- The format of the XID Request and Logical Null XID are the
- same. The two types are distinguished by the roles assumed by
- the two nodes. In current implementations, the DSN initiates
- the XID exchange by sending the Logical Null XID. The SNA
- Gateway responds with the XID request.
-
-
-
-
- Behl, Sterling & Teskey [Page 4]
-
- RFC 1538 Advanced SNA/IP October 1993
-
-
-
- Logical SNA XID
-
- Use: Sent in response to an XID Request and in the context of
- SNA XID negotiation.
-
- Format:
-
- ----------------------------------------------------
- | IP Header | UDP Header | 0xBF | SNA XID data |
- ----------------------------------------------------
-
- For PU 2.0 nodes, the SNA XID data consists of a Format 0 XID
- [3].
- For PU 2.1 nodes, the SNA XID data consists of a Format 3 XID
- [3].
-
-
- A typical Connection Establishment data flow appears below.
-
-
- Node 1 Node 2
-
- Logical Null XID ------------------------->
- <------------------------ XID Request
- Logical SNA XID -------------------------->
- <------------------------ TCP SYN
- TCP SYN ACK ----------------------------->
- <------------------------ TCP ACK
-
- Note: The source UDP port of the Logical Null XID equals the
- destination TCP port of the TCP SYN segment.
-
- Retries of the Logical Null XID by the initiating node should occur
- periodically until an XID Request is received in reply. The frequency
- of the retries is left up to the implementor. The lower bound on the
- retry timer should be more than the expected round trip time for a
- packet on the network.
-
- 3.3.2. Data Transfer
-
- There are no special packets defined for the Data Transfer phase.
- Once the TCP connection is established, SNA Request Units (RUs) may
- be exchanged between the two end nodes. The SNA session data appears
- as TCP segment data. The only added SNA/IP requirement is that each
- SNA message consisting of a Transmission Header (TH),
- Request/Response Header (RH) and an optional Request/Response Request
- Unit (RU) be preceded by a two octet length field. Examples of Data
-
-
-
- Behl, Sterling & Teskey [Page 5]
-
- RFC 1538 Advanced SNA/IP October 1993
-
-
- Transfer frames are shown below.
-
- -------------------------------------------------------
- | IP Header | TCP Header | SNA Msg 1 len | SNA Msg 1 |
- -------------------------------------------------------
-
- ----------------------------------------------
- | IP Header | TCP Header | SNA Msg 1 cont'd ->
- ----------------------------------------------
- --------------------------------
- | SNA Msg 2 len | SNA Msg 2 |
- --------------------------------
-
- The length field is passed in big endian format. 0 is a valid length
- value.
-
- The format of the SNA Message pieces are as defined by SNA [3].
-
- Reliable and sequential delivery of data is provided by the TCP
- protocol [5,6].
-
- 3.3.3. Connection Termination and Loss
-
- Either SNA node may, at any time, terminate the logical SNA
- connection by issuing a TCP-level FIN segment. Dictates of the TCP
- protocol apply to this termination process [5,6].
-
- A connection is also terminated, though not as cleanly, if a TCP
- Reset segment is sent by either SNA node.
-
- Once a connection is terminated, a new connection may be established
- by the process outlined in the Connection Establishment section. For
- reconnections made to the LinkMaster 6200 gateway, the same UDP
- source port must be used by the initiating node. This implies that
- the same TCP port is used. This requirement stems from the fact the
- gateway may not always be aware that a TCP connection has been
- terminated. This would happen if the DSN became disabled prior to
- sending a FIN or Reset segment. Under these circumstances, SNA host
- resources remain allocated and a reconnection from a DSN, which the
- host believes to already be in session, is not allowed. By requiring
- the DSN to use the same port when reestablishing a connection, the
- LinkMaster 6200 is able to recognize when a reset of the host
- connection is required.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Behl, Sterling & Teskey [Page 6]
-
- RFC 1538 Advanced SNA/IP October 1993
-
-
- 3.3.4. Complete Session Data Flow
-
- Node 1 Node 2
-
- Logical Null XID ------------------------->
- (UDP Datagram)
- Logical Null XID ------------------------->
- (UDP Datagram)
- <------------------------ XID Request
- (UDP Datagram)
- Logical SNA XID -------------------------->
- (UDP Datagram)
- <------------------------ TCP SYN
- (TCP Message)
- TCP SYN ACK ----------------------------->
- (TCP Message)
- <------------------------ TCP SYN
- (TCP Message)
-
- ****************** Connection Established *******************
-
- <------------------------ SNA ACTPU
- (TCP Message)
- SNA ACTPU Response --------------------->
- (TCP Message)
- <------------------------ SNA ACTLU
- (TCP Message)
- SNA ACTLU Response --------------------->
- (TCP Message)
- .
- .
- .
- <------------------------ TCP FIN
- (TCP Message)
- TCP FIN ACK ------------------------>
- (TCP Message)
- <------------------------ TCP ACK
- (TCP Message)
-
- ******************** Connection Closed *********************
-
- Logical Null XID ----------------------->
- (UDP Datagram)
- .
- .
- .
- .
-
-
-
-
- Behl, Sterling & Teskey [Page 7]
-
- RFC 1538 Advanced SNA/IP October 1993
-
-
- 3.3.5. State Transition Table for the Initiating Node
-
- Transition State
- Given State | No Conn | Null XID Sent | SNA XID Sent | Conn Estb
- ------------+---------+---------------+--------------+-----------
- No | | Internal Act. | |
- Connection | | Stimulus | |
- | | ---> Sends | |
- | | 1st Null XID | |
- ------------+---------+---------------+--------------+-----------
- Null XID | | Internal | XID Request |
- Sent | | Timer Event | Received |
- | | ----> Resend | ----> Sends |
- | | Null XID | SNA XID |
- ------------+---------+---------------+--------------+-----------
- SNA XID | | Internal | SNA XID | Indication
- Sent | | Timer Event | Received | that TCP
- | | ----> Resend | ----> Send | connection
- | | Null XID | SNA XID | is estb.
- | | | |
- ------------+---------+---------------+--------------+-----------
- Connection | Indica- | | | SNA
- Established | tion | | | Session
- | that | | | Data
- | TCP conn| | |
- | term. | | |
-
-
- A gateway state transition table is not provided here because the
- state transitions are dependent on the nature of the SNA host
- interface (3172 Channel Protocol, 3174 Channel Protocol, SDLC, etc.).
-
- 4. LLC to SNA/IP Conversion
-
- The use of Advanced SNA/IP to convert conventional token ring- based
- SNA traffic to a routable form is both conceivable and practical.
- While interesting, a discussion of this application falls outside the
- context of this RFC. Very briefly, it can be said that an SNA/IP-
- based "subnet SNA gateway" application could do many of the things
- being discussed in the context of the DLSw specification [1].
-
- 5. Performance
-
- The performance of SNA sessions running over an SNA/IP connection
- will be affected by the bandwidth available on the network and by how
- much traffic is on the network. SNA/IP is poised to take full
- advantage of the prioritization and class of service enhancements
- promised in the next generation of IP. Today, SNA/IP can take
-
-
-
- Behl, Sterling & Teskey [Page 8]
-
- RFC 1538 Advanced SNA/IP October 1993
-
-
- advantage of router packet prioritization schemes based on port
- number. SNA/IP also leaves intact the standard SNA class of service
- prioritization protocol.
-
- Performance measures taken at McDATA comparing the throughput of
- SNA/IP and LLC across a single token-ring segment showed
- approximately a 15 percent decrease in the maximum transactions per
- hour (1500 bytes to the DSN, 50 bytes out to the host) for SNA/IP.
- This decrease is well within the expected levels given the added
- processing requirements of TCP/IP over LLC in the LinkMaster 6200 and
- LinkMaster 7100 operating environments.
-
- 6. VTAM Definition
-
- The host VTAM definition of SNA/IP downstream nodes is dependent on
- the gateway implementation. Downstream nodes may appear as switched
- major nodes connected to an XCA or as downstream nodes connected to a
- PU 2.0 controller [4].
-
- 7. Acknowledgments
-
- The authors wish to acknowledge that the definition of SNA/IP was a
- collaborative effort involving many individuals ranging from
- customers to sales and marketing personnel to engineers. Particular
- thanks go to David Beal, Steve Cartwright, Tracey Floming, Audrey
- McEwen, Mark Platte, Paul Schroeder, Chuck Weil, and Marty Wright,
- who all played key roles in the development and testing of this
- protocol and also in the editing of this RFC.
-
- 8. References
-
- [1] Dixon, R., and D. Kushi, "Data Link Switching: Switch-to-Switch
- Protocol", RFC 1434, IBM, March 1993.
-
- [2] "Token-Ring Network Architecture Reference", IBM document #SC30-
- 3374-02.
-
- [3] "Systems Network Architecture Formats", IBM document #GA27-3136-
- 12.
-
- [4] "VTAM Resource Definition Reference", IBM document #SC31-6438-1.
-
- [5] Comer, D., "Internetworking with TCP/IP Volume I", Prentice Hall
- 1991.
-
- [6] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol - DARPA Internet
- Program Protocol Specification", STD 7, RFC 793, USC/Information
- Sciences Institute, September 1981.
-
-
-
- Behl, Sterling & Teskey [Page 9]
-
- RFC 1538 Advanced SNA/IP October 1993
-
-
- 9. Security Considerations
-
- This RFC does not address issues of security. SNA level security
- procedures and protocols apply when SNA/IP is used as the transport.
-
- 10. Authors' Addresses
-
- Wilfred Behl
- 310 Interlocken Parkway
- Broomfield, Colorado 80021
-
- Phone: 303-460-4142
- Email: wil@mcdata.com
-
-
- Barbara Sterling
- 310 Interlocken Parkway
- Broomfield, Colorado 80021
-
- Phone: 303-460-4211
- Email: bjs@mcdata.com
-
-
- William Teskey
- 2125 112th Ave. North East
- Suite 303
- Bellevue, WA 98004
-
- Phone: 206-450-0650
- Email: wct@ioc-sea.com
-
- Note: Any questions or comments relative to the contents of this RFC
- should be sent to snaip@mcdata.com. This address will be used to
- coordinate the handling of responses.
-
- 11. Disclaimer
-
- McDATA, the McDATA logo, and LinkMaster are registered trademarks of
- McDATA Corporation. All other product names and identifications are
- trademarks of their respective manufacturers, who are not affiliated
- with McDATA Corporation.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Behl, Sterling & Teskey [Page 10]
-
-