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.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1996). All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) [1] provides a standard method for transporting multi-protocol datagrams over point-to-point links. PPP defines an extensible Link Control Protocol, and proposes a family of Network Control Protocols for establishing and configuring different network-layer protocols.

This document defines the Network Control Protocols for establishing and configuring Systems Network Architecture (SNA) over PPP and SNA over LLC 802.2 over PPP.

Table of Contents

1.  Introduction
1.1  Specification of Requirements
1.2  Terminology
2.  A PPP Network Control Protocol for SNA
3.  Sending SNA PIUs and NLPs.
3.1  Sending SNA XID or FID2 PIUs over LLC
3.2  Sending HPR Network Layer Packets (NLPs)
3.3  Other Considerations
4.  Security Considerations
5.  Acknowledgements
§  References
§  Author's Address
§  Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements

1. Introduction

PPP has three main components:

1. A method for encapsulating multi-protocol datagrams.

2. A Link Control Protocol (LCP) for establishing, configuring, and testing the data-link connection.

3. A family of Network Control Protocols for establishing and configuring different network-layer protocols.

In order to establish communications over a point-to-point link, each end of the PPP link must first send LCP packets to configure and test the data link. After the link has been established and optional facilities have been negotiated as needed by the LCP, PPP must send SNACP packets to choose and configure the SNA network-layer protocol. Once SNACP has reached the Opened state, SNA datagrams can be sent over the link.

The link will remain configured for communications until explicit LCP or SNACP packets close the link down, or until some external event occurs (an inactivity timer expires or network administrator intervention).

1.1 Specification of Requirements

In this document, several words are used to signify the requirements of the specification. These words are often capitalized.

   MUST      This word, or the adjective "required", means that the
             definition is an absolute requirement of the specification.

   MUST NOT  This phrase means that the definition is an absolute
             prohibition of the specification.

   SHOULD    This word, or the adjective "recommended", means that there
             may exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to
             ignore this item, but the full implications must be
             understood and carefully weighed before choosing a
             different course.

   MAY       This word, or the adjective "optional", means that this
             item is one of an allowed set of alternatives.  An
             implementation which does not include this option MUST be
             prepared to interoperate with another implementation which
             does include the option.

1.2 Terminology

This document frequently uses the following terms:

   datagram  The unit of transmission in the network layer (such as IP).
             A datagram may be encapsulated in one or more packets
             passed to the data link layer.

   frame     The unit of transmission at the data link layer.  A frame
             may include a header and/or a trailer, along with some
             number of units of data.

   packet    The basic unit of encapsulation, which is passed across the
             interface between the network layer and the data link
             layer.  A packet is usually mapped to a frame; the
             exceptions are when data link layer fragmentation is being
             performed, or when multiple packets are incorporated into a
             single frame.

   peer      The other end of the point-to-point link.

   silently discard
             This means the implementation discards the packet without
             further processing.  The implementation SHOULD provide the
             capability of logging the error, including the contents of
             the silently discarded packet, and SHOULD record the event
             in a statistics counter.

   PIU       Path information unit.  A message unit consisting of a
             transmission header (TH) alone, or a TH followed by a basic
             information unit (BIU) or a BIU segment.  PIU is analogous
             to datagram.

   TH        Transmission header.  Control information, optionally
             followed by a basic information unit (BIU) or a BIU
             segment, that is created and used by path control to route
             message units and to control their flow within the network.

   BIU       Basic information unit.  In SNA, the unit of data and
             control information passed between half-sessions.  It
             consists of a request/response header (RH) followed by a
             request/response unit (RU).

   message unit
             In SNA, the unit of data processed by any layer; for
             example, a basic information unit (BIU), a path information
             unit (PIU), or a request/response unit (RU).

   NLP       Network Layer Packet.  In High Performance Routing (HPR),
             the message unit used to carry data over the route.
             Network Layer Packet is analogous to datagram.

2. A PPP Network Control Protocol for SNA

The SNA Control Protocol (SNACP) is responsible for configuring, enabling, and disabling SNA on both ends of the point-to-point link. SNACP uses the same packet exchange mechanism as the Link Control Protocol (LCP). SNACP packets may not be exchanged until PPP has reached the Network-Layer Protocol phase. SNACP packets received before this phase is reached should be silently discarded.

Note that there are actually two SNA Network Control Protocols; one for SNA over LLC 802.2 and another for SNA without LLC 802.2. These SNA NCPs are negotiated separately and independently of each other.

The SNA Control Protocol is exactly the same as the Link Control Protocol [1] with the following exceptions:

Frame Modifications

The packet may utilize any modifications to the basic frame format which have been negotiated during the Link Establishment phase.

Data Link Layer Protocol Field

Exactly one SNACP packet is encapsulated in the PPP Information field, where the PPP Protocol field indicates type hex 804B (SNA over LLC 802.2) or hex 804D (SNA).

Code field

Only Codes 1 through 7 (Configure-Request, Configure-Ack, Configure-Nak, Configure-Reject, Terminate-Request, Terminate-Ack and Code-Reject) are used. Other Codes should be treated as unrecognized and should result in Code-Rejects.

Timeouts

SNACP packets may not be exchanged until PPP has reached the Network-Layer Protocol phase. An implementation should be prepared to wait for Authentication and Link Quality Determination to finish before timing out waiting for a Configure-Ack or other response. It is suggested that an implementation give up only after user intervention or a configurable amount of time.

Configuration Option Types

There are no Configuration Options for SNA or for SNA over LLC 802.2.

3. Sending SNA PIUs and NLPs.

Before any SNA packets may be communicated, PPP must reach the Network-Layer Protocol phase, and the appropriate SNA Control Protocol must reach the Opened state.

The maximum length of a SNA packet transmitted over a PPP link is the same as the maximum length of the Information field of a PPP encapsulated packet.

The format of the PPP Information field itself is the same as that defined in [1]. Detailed information on SNA and APPN can be found in [3], [4], [5], [6], and [7].

3.1 Sending SNA XID or FID2 PIUs over LLC

Exactly one SNA XID or FID2 PIU over LLC 802.2 is encapsulated in the PPP Information field, where the PPP Protocol field indicates type hex 004B (SNA over LLC 802.2).

A summary of this frame structure, beginning with the PPP Protocol field, is shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to right.

                -- LLC portion (PPP Information Field) -------------
               |                                                    |
   -+----------+----------+----------+----------+-------------------+-
    | Protocol | DSAP     | SSAP     | Control  | LLC Information   |
    | 0x004B   | Address  | Address  | Field    | Field             |
   -+----------+----------+----------+----------+-------------------+-

The LLC information field contains the XID or FID2 PIU. LLC(2) is included in this format for link-level error recovery. Error recovery is done by the routers at each end of the PPP link.

3.2 Sending HPR Network Layer Packets (NLPs)

Exactly one HPR Network Layer Packet (NLP) is encapsulated in the PPP Information field, where the PPP Protocol field indicates type hex 004D (SNA).

A summary of this frame structure, beginning with the PPP Protocol field, is shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to right.

                -- HPR Network Layer Packet (NLP) --
                  |   (PPP Information Field)          |
      -+----------+--------+--------+------------------+-
       | Protocol | NHDR   | THDR   | data             |
       | 0x004D   |        |        |                  |
      -+----------+--------+--------+------------------+-

3.3 Other Considerations

It is architecturally possible to transport HPR NLPs over LLC over PPP using PPP Protocol field type hex 004B (SNA over LLC 802.2) if the optional HPR link-level error recover tower is included in the implementation.

4. Security Considerations

Security issues are not discussed in this memo.

5. Acknowledgements

Some of the text in this document is taken from previous documents produced by the Point-to-Point Protocol Working Group of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).

Some of the text in this document is taken from miscellaneous IBM documents.

Many people provided suggestions and portions of text for this document. Special thanks to Allen Carriker, Marcia Peters, and Scott G. Wasson.

References

Author's Address

Intellectual Property Statement

The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.

The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive Director.

Full Copyright Statement

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1996). All Rights Reserved.

This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English.

The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.

This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Acknowledgment

Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.