Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

UNKNOWN
Network Working Group                                         Wayne McCoyRequest for Comments: 1007                                       June 1987MILITARY SUPPLEMENT                               TO THE                       ISO TRANSPORT PROTOCOLStatus of this Memo   This RFC is being distributed to members of the Internet community   in order to solicit comments on the Draft Military Supplement.   While this document may not be directly relevant to the research   problems of the Internet, it may  be of some interest to a number   of researchers and implementors. Distribution of this memor is   unlimited.1. SCOPE1.1   Purpose.   This document supplements the Transport Service and Protocol of the   International Standards Organization (ISO), IS 8072 and IS 8073,   respectively, and their formal descriptions by providing conventions,   option selections and parameter values to be used when the protocol   is operated within the scope of the applicability statement in   Paragraph 1.3 below.  Paragraph 1.4, below, describes the ISO   standards.  Full implementation detail is not provided in this   document, but reference is made to a separate document, entitled   "Implementation Guide for the ISO Transport Protocol", in which   guidance for implementation is given.1.2  Organization.   Five sections comprise this supplement.  InSection 1, the role and   purpose of the Transport Protocol are stated and the international   standards upon which the protocol is based are described.  These   documents, as well as others supporting  the international standards   and this supplement are listed inSection 2.  Other definitions not   already included in the international standards and supporting   documents are given inSection 3.  The international standards cover   a very wide variety of network environments and situations.  There   is, thus, a collection of options and parameters provided by the   standards which must be determined for specific uses.Section 4   states the options and parameters relevant to those implementations   to which this supplement applies, and defines usage conventions.McCoy                                                           [Page 1]

RFC 1007                                                       June 1987   Conventions for addressing and Transport connection reference   number usage and recovery of the Transport connection from peer   deactivation are covered inSection 5.1.3   Application.   The use of the Transport Protocol Class 4 and the Protocol for   Providing the Connectionless-Mode Network Service (IS 8473) is   mandatory foruse in all DOD packet-switched data networks where   there is a potential for host-to-host connectivity across network   or subnetwork boundaries.  The term "network" as used here shall   include Local Area Networks but not integrated weapons systems.   The use of the Transport Protocol Class 4 and IS 8473 is   strongly encouraged, particularly  where a need for equipment   interchangeability or survivability is perceived. Use of the   Transport Protocol Class 4 and IS 8473 in weapons systems, where   such usage does not diminish required performance, is also   encouraged.1.4   International Standards Organization Transport Protocol.   The international standard upon which this supplement is based is   described in four documents:       a. IS 8072, the Transport Service Definition, which defines the          service that Transport provides to a user, described in          English text;       b. WG4 N53, the Formal Description of the Transport Service, in          which the Transport Service is described using a formal          description language;       c. IS 8073, the Transport Protocol, in which the protocol is          specified in English text; and       d. N123, the formal description of the Transport Protocol, in          which the specification IS 8073 is written in a formal          description language.   The ISO protocol has five classes of service, named Class 0 through   Class 4.  Only Classes 4 and 2 will apply to this supplement.  The   formal description language, Estelle, DP 9074, provides for protocol   descriptions in terms of communicating finite state automata. It   contains a subset language which corresponds to the international   standard Pascal.  The Class 4 protocol operation when supported by a   connectionless network service is described in an addendum to IS   8073, N3339(rev).McCoy                                                           [Page 2]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19872.  REFERENCED DOCUMENTS2.1  Issues of Documents.   The following documents of the issue in effect on date of invitation   for bids or request for proposal form a part of this supplement to   the extent specified herein.                 FED-STD-1037  - Federal Standard - 1037,                   Glossary of Telecommunication Terms.            Implementation Guide for the ISO Transport Protocol2.2  Other Publications.   The following documents form part of this standard to the extent   specified herin.  Unless otherwise indicated, the issue in effect on   the date of invitation for bids or request for proposal shall apply.   IS 8072 - Information Processing Systems -        Open Systems Interconnection - Transport Service Definition.        Available from: ANSI ISO TC97/SC6 Secretariat 1430 Broadway        New York, NY 10018 (212) 354-3343   IS 8073 - Information Processing Systems -        Open Systems Interconnection - Transport  Protocol        Specification. Available from ANSI (SC6 Secretariat).   N3339(rev) - Draft Proposed Addendum to IS 8073        to Enable Class 4 Operation Over Connectionless Mode Network        Service as Defined in ISO/ISO 8348/AD1.  Available from ANSI        (SC6 Secretariat).   DP 9074 - Estelle - A Formal Description        Technique Based on an Extended State Transition Model.        Available from ANSI (SC21 Secretariat), address as for SC6,        above.   WG4 N53 - Information Processing Systems -        Open Systems Interconnection - Formal Description of IS 8072        in Estelle. (Working draft, ISO TC 97/SC 6/WG 4)   N123 - Information Processing Systems -        Open Systems Interconnection - Formal Description of IS 8073        in Estelle. (Working draft, ISO TC 97/SC 6)   IS 8473 - Information Processing Systems -        Data Communications - Protocol for Providing the        Connectionless-mode Network Service. Available from ANSI        (SC6 Secretariat).McCoy                                                           [Page 3]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19873. DEFINITIONS3.1   Definition of terms.   The definition of terms used in this standard shall comply with   FED-STD-1037, ISO IS 8072, IS 8073 and IS 8473.  Other terms and   definitions unique to N3756, WG4 N53 and N3339(rev) appear in   those documents.3.2   Abbreviations and acronyms.   The following abbreviations and acronyms are used in this   supplement:     a.  ISO.  The International Standards Organization;     b.  OSI.  Open Systems Interconnection;     c.  TS.  Transport service;     d.  TSAP.  Transport service access point;     e.  NSAP.  Network service access point;     f.  TPDU.  Transport protocol data unit;     g.  CR.  Connect request;     h.  CC.  Connect confirm;     i.  DR.  Disconnect request;     j.  ER.  Error;     k.  AK.  Acknowledgement;     l.  IP.  Internetwork protocol;     m.  LAN.  Local area network.     n.  CONS. Connection oriented network service.     o.  CLNS. Connectionless network service.     (Other provisions of this Section are under consideration.)McCoy                                                           [Page 4]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19874. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS4.1   Conformance.   Implementations to which this supplement applies shall satisfy the   conformance requirements (Clause 14, of IS 8073 and N3339(rev), as   adapted for this supplement) in the following statements.     a.  A system claiming to implement the procedures specified         in this standard shall comply with the requirements in         b. - d., below.     b.  The system shall implement:         b.1  Class 2 or Class 0 or both, if operated over a connection              oriented network service; or         b.2  Class 4 if operated over a connectionless network service.     c.  If the system implements Class 4, it shall also implement         Class 2, if it is operated over a connection oriented network         service.  Class 2 shall not be implemented if operation is         exclusively over a connectionless network service.     d.  For each class which the system claims to implement, the         system shall be capable of:         d.1  initiating CR TPDUs or responding to CR TPDUs with TPDUs              or both;         d.2  responding to any other TPDU and operating network              service in accordance with procedures for the class;         d.3  operating all the procedures for the class listed as              mandatory in the Provisions of Options table below;         d.4  operating those procedures for the class, listed as as              optional in the Provisions of Options table, for which              conformance is claimed; and         d.5  handling all TPDUs of lengths up to the lesser value of:              d.5.1  the maximum length for the class;              d.5.2  the maximum for which conformance is claimed.     e.  Claims of conformance shall state:         e.1  whether or not operation over connectionless service is              implemented;         e.2  which class or classes of protocol are implemented, ifMcCoy                                                           [Page 5]

RFC 1007                                                       June 1987              operation over a connection oriented network is              implemented;         e.3  whether the system is capable of initiating or responding              to CR TPDUs or both;         e.4  which of the procedures listed in the Provisions of              Options table are implemented;         e.5  the maximum size of TPDU implemented; the value shall be              chosen from the following list and all values in the list              which are less than this maximum shall be implemented:              128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, or 8192 octets.   Provision of options (adapted from IS 8073, Table 9)    __________________________________________________________________   |        PROCEDURE         |     CLASS 2        |     CLASS 4     |   |__________________________|____________________|_________________|   |                          |                    |                 |   |TPDU with checksum        |not applicable      |mandatory        |   |TPDU without checksum     |mandatory           |optional         |   |__________________________|____________________|_________________|   |                          |                    |                 |   |Expedited data transfer   |mandatory           |mandatory        |   |No expedited data transfer|mandatory           |mandatory        |   |__________________________|____________________|_________________|   |                          |                    |                 |   |Flow control in Class 2   |mandatory           |not applicable   |   |No flow control in Class 2|optional            |not applicable   |   |__________________________|____________________|_________________|   |                          |                    |                 |   |Normal formats            |mandatory           |mandatory        |   |Extended formats          |optional            |optional         |   |__________________________|____________________|_________________|   The explicit manner in which implementations, to which this   supplement applies, shall satisfy these conformance statements is   given in Paragraph 4.4.  The options are described in more detail in   Paragraph 4.3.4.2   Transport Service access parameters.   Each of the services of transport has parameters that identify   communicating peers, express options for operation of the transport   connection, or transmit data from one peer user to the other.  The   conventions for these parameters for usage in implementations to   which this supplement applies are given below.McCoy                                                           [Page 6]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19874.2.1   Connect Service.   The Connect Service is summarized below (refer to IS 8072 for   detailed discussion):   __________________________________________________________________   |             Primitives                        Parameters       |   |________________________________________________________________|   | T-CONNECT          request     |  Called Address,              |   |                    indication  |  Calling Address,             |   |                                |  Expedited Data Option,       |   |                                |  Quality of Service,          |   |                                |  TS User-Data                 |   |________________________________|_______________________________|   | T-CONNECT          response    |  Responding Address,          |   |                    confirm     |  Quality of Service,          |   |                                |  Expedited Data Option,       |   |                                |  TS User-Data                 |   |________________________________|_______________________________|   Conventions for Called Address, Calling Address and Responding   Address will appear in Paragraph 5.1.1.  Use of the Expedited   Data Option is dependent on the nature of the transport user;   this supplement does not define how transport users will decide   on such usage.  The parameters that define Quality of Service are   discussed in IS 8072.  However, the manner in which these   parameters are to be applied in an implementation issue , and the   mechanisms to be used to maintain the requested quality of sevice   are not defined.  It is thus recommended that these parameters   not be used in implementations until such time that usage   definition exists. The amount of data passed in TS User-Data is   constrained to 32 octets or less.  (This TS User-Data parameter   shall not be used for any data that requires any security protection   whatever.)  No implementation is required to be able to send such   data received from its user, but each implementation shall be   capable of passing data received from the remote peer user during   connection establishment to its user.4.2.2   Disconnect Service.   __________________________________________________________________   |             Primitives                        Parameters       |   |________________________________________________________________|   | T-DISCONNECT       request     |  TS User-Data                 |   |________________________________|_______________________________|   | T-DISCONNECT       indication  |  TS User-Data,                |   |                                |  Disconnect reason            |   |________________________________|_______________________________|   The Disconnect Service is abrupt in the sense that data may be lostMcCoy                                                           [Page 7]

RFC 1007                                                       June 1987   whenever the service is invoked.  Transport user processes should   therefore ensure that all data intended to be received has in fact   been received before issuing a T-DISCONNECT-request.  The data used   in the TS User-Data parameter is constrained to be 64 octets or less   in length.  (The TS User-Data parameter shall not be used for data   that requires any security protection whatever.)  Disconnect reasons   are discussed in IS 8073, and reasons other than those listed in IS   8073 are permitted.4.2.3   Data Transfer Service.   __________________________________________________________________   |             Primitives                      Parameters         |   |________________________________________________________________|   | T-DATA             request     |  TS User-Data                 |   |                    indication  |                               |   |________________________________|_______________________________|   The length of the data that is carried by the TS User-Data parameter   is not constrained by the ISO Standard, but interface considerations   may impose practical limits.  This is discussed further in the   Implementors guide, Part 3.1.  For the purposes of this supplement,   the TS User-Data parameter in this service is considered to be   protected and should be used for any data requiring security   protection.4.2.4   Expedited Data Service.   __________________________________________________________________   |               Primitives                   Parameters          |   |________________________________________________________________|   | T-EXPEDITED-DATA   request     |  TS User-Data                 |   |                    indication  |                               |   |________________________________|_______________________________|   The TS User-Data parameter is constrained to be no longer than   16 octets and shall not be used for data requiring any security   protection whatever.  The T-EXPEDITED-DATA-request cannot be used   whenever non-use of expedited data was called for in either the   T-CONNECT-request or T-CONNECT-response primitive.4.3   Options.   The protocol described in IS 8073 and N3756 permits certain options   which qualify or enhance the service to be provided.  Negotiated   options are those which both communicating peer transport entities   agree upon during connection establishment. Local options are those   which apply to a particular implementation of transport that may   be used to enhance performance, optimize resource utilization or   improve resilience to network failures. The election of a local   option is invisible to the remote peer entity.McCoy                                                           [Page 8]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19874.3.1  Negotiated options.   The options in IS 8073 that shall be negotiated between peer   transport entities are given in the following list.  The elections   of these options to be taken in  an implementation to which this   supplement applies are defined in Paragraph 4.4.     a.   a. Class of service--agreement as to one of five classes of          transport service, depending on which classes are supported by          the entities, the quality of the network service available and          the degree of resilience to network errors and failure          required by the peer transport users.     b.   b. Use of extended formats--agreement to use or not use          extended formats for sequence numbering and flow control          credit; normal formats provide sequence numbers in the range 0          - (2**7 - 1) and flow control credit in the range 0 - (2**15 -          1); extended  formats provided sequence numbers in the range 0          - (2**31 - 1)  and credit in the range 0 - (2**16 - 1).     c.   Use of expedited data transfer--agreement to use or not to use          expedited data transfer during normal data transfer          procedures.     d.   Maximum size of protocol data units to be exchanged--agreement          to limit size of exchanged protocol data units, depending on          buffer resources that the entities have and network quality of          service; values negotiated are in the range 2**7 - 2**13          octets (total length).     e.   Use of checksum--agreement to use or not to use a 16-bit          checksum on each protocol data unit exchange between the          entities, depending on expected residual error rate in the          network service used.     f.   Protection parameters--agreement as to how protection will be          defined and maintained on the transport connection; these          parameters are defined by the communicants which elect to use          them.     g.   Use of flow control in Class 2--agreement to use or not to use          flow control in Class 2 when Class 2 operation has been          negotiated. Conformance to the ISO Standard requires that if          Class 4 is supported over CONS, then Class 2 shall also be          supported.     h.   Service quality parameters--agreement as to the quality of          service to be expected on the transport connection; the ISO          Standard does not state how these parameters are to be used by          the transport entities or their users.McCoy                                                           [Page 9]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19874.3.2   Local options, Class 2.   The options that an implementor may decide in a particular Class 2   implementation are given in the following list.  Recommendations   and requirements for these options for the purposes of this   this supplement are given in Paragraph 4.5.1.     a.   Multiplexing on network connection--for better usage of of          network resources, an implementation may elect to share a          network connection among two or more transport connections.     b.   Acknowledgement strategy--an implementation is not required by          IS 8073 to use any particular strategy for sending          acknowledgements for received data:  each data transfer          protocol data unit may be explicitly acknowledged (one-for-          one) or may be implicitly acknowledged by a group          acknowledgement (one-for-N).     c.   Concatenation of protocol data units--when network service          data units are large compared to the protocol data units to be          sent, an implementation may elect to concatenate these          protocol data units into a single network service data unit.     d.   Lockup prevention timer--when the wait-before-closing state is          entered, there is a possibility of deadlock if the peer          transport entity never responds to the CR TPDU.  The standard          provides for an optional timer to alleviate this situation.4.3.3   Local options, Class 4.   The options that an implementor may decide in a particular Class 4   implementation are given in the list below.  Recommendations and   requirements for use of these options in implementations to which   this supplement applies are given in Paragraph 4.5.2.     a.   Withdrawal of flow control credit--when supporting several          connections of differing precedence or priority, resource          management must be practiced so as to maintain the precedence          or priority relationships.     b.   Flow control confirmation--when flow control credit is          reduced, extra delay may be encountered because          acknowledgements carrying new flow control information are          lost; this procedure aids in speeding up resynchronization of          the flow control.     c.   Subsequenced acknowledgements--when the flow control window          has been closed this procedure alleviates ambiguity due to          lost or out-of-order acknowledgements.McCoy                                                          [Page 10]

RFC 1007                                                       June 1987     d.   Splitting over network connection--when operating over a          connection-oriented network service, a Class 4 implementation          is permitted to use more than one network connection, for          better performance and better resilience to network connection          failure.     e.   Acknowledgement strategy--an implementation is not required by          the standard to use any particular strategy for sending          acknowledgements for received data:  each data transfer          protocol data unit may be explicitly acknowledged (one-for-          one) or may be implicitly acknowledged by a group          acknowledgement (one-for-N).     f.   Wait-before-closing state--when a connect request has been          sent to the peer and the user has requested a disconnection          before the connect confirmation has been received, an          implementation may elect to wait until the confirmation has          arrived before sending the disconnection request to the peer,          to ensure positive identification of the connection to be          released.     g.   Multiplexing on network connection--for better usage of          network resources, an implementation may elect to share a          network connection among two or more transport connections.     h.   Concatenation of protocol data units--when network service          data units are large compared to the protocol data units to be          sent, an implementation may elect to concatenate these          protocol data units into a single network service data unit.     i.   Checksum algorithm--the Fletcher checksum algorithm provided          in an annex to the standard is not part of the standard and is          provided for information only.  The checksum algorithm used          nature of network errors expected and need only satisfy the          summation criterion given in the standard.     j.   Send network RESET when bad checksum received--it may not be          possible to know with certainty which of several transport          connections multiplexed on a network connection is to receive          a protocol data unit which carries a bad checksum.  A N-RESET          or N-DISCONNECT may be sent on the network connection to all          transport entities on the connection to indicate the error.     k.   Protocol data unit retransmission policy--protocol data units          for which no acknowledgement has been received may be          retransmitted in case the originals were never received.          Whether to retransmit only the oldest unacknowledged protocol          data unit or all those that are outstanding has implications          for buffer management in the sending entity and for          utilization of the bandwidth in the network transmissionMcCoy                                                          [Page 11]

RFC 1007                                                       June 1987          medium.4.4   Negotiations.   Paragraph 4.2.1 lists those options that shall be negotiatied by   communicating transport entities.  Below,  conventions are given for   these options, in usage to which this  supplement applies.  These   requirements reflect the conformance statement of IS 8073 and the   needs of the DOD.4.4.1   Options.4.4.1.1   Class of service.     a.   An implementation operating on CONS shall be capable of          offering Class 2 and may optionally support Class 0.     b.   An implementation shall not respond by a proposal of Class 0          and shall not respond by a proposal of Class 2 if the connect          request was received on a CLNS.     c.   An implementation may offer Class 2 as an alternative class of          operation in a connect request when operating over CONS. No          alternative class may be offered if operation over a CLNS.     d.   An implementation shall respond to a connect request that          proposes Class 1 or 3 as primary choice with a disconnect          request, reason code 128+2 (see p. 87 of IS 8073).     e.   An implementation shall not propose Class 1 or Class 3 in          response to a connect request carrying Class 1 or Class 3 as          an alternative class of service.     f.   An implementation which proposes Class 4 in a connect request          need not accept a proposal for Class 2 from its peer if Class          2 was not offered as an alternative in the connect request, or          if operation is over a CLNS. Class 2 shall be accepted when          proposed by the responding peer if it  was offered as an          alternative in the connect request.4.4.1.2   Extended formats.     a.   An implementation shall always propose use of extended formats          when either Class 4 or Class 2 is proposed in a connect          request.     b.   An implementation shall always accept the use of extended          formats when so proposed in a received connect request.McCoy                                                          [Page 12]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19874.4.1.3   Expedited data.     a.   Use of expedited data is subject to negotiation by users of          Transport Service.     b.   Expedited data shall be supported in Class 2.4.4.1.4   Maximum protocol data unit size.   (The provisions of this paragraph are under consideration.)4.4.1.5   Use of checksum.   An implementation shall propose use of checksums consistent with the   expected quality of service and security requirements.     a.   Checksums should be used when operating with the IP on          catenated networks.     b.   Checksums should not be used if high performance is required,          except when required by high error rates in the network          service.     c.   Checksums should always be used when any encryption is being          used.4.4.1.6   Protection parameters.   Use of the security parameters is not defined in this supplement.4.4.1.7   Use of flow control in Class 2.     a.   An implementation shall always propose the use of flow control          in Class 2 whenever Class 2 is proposed as either primary or          alternative choice of service.     b.   An implementation shall accept use of flow control in Class 2          whenever negotiation to Class 2 occurs.4.4.1.8  Service quality parameters.     a.   Use of the service quality parameters in the CR and CC          protocol data units is not defined except for the residual          error rate parameter and the priority parameter.     b.   Residual error rate (the use of this parameter is under          consideration).McCoy                                                          [Page 13]

RFC 1007                                                       June 1987     c.   Priority (the use of this parameter is under consideration).4.4.2   Parameters.          This paragraph defines the values to be used in the CR and CC          TPDUs.4.4.2.1   Class 2 parameters.4.4.2.1.1   Connect request (CR) protocol data unit.4.4.2.1.1.1   Fixed part of header.     a.   Connect request code: as in IS 8073.     b.   Initial credit allocation: this field defines the number of          TPDUs offered as initial credit by the connection initiator.          Since the field is of length  4, the maximum credit that can          be initially offered is limited to 15.  These TPDUs are          constrained in length to the maximum size defined in the TPDU          size field, listed below in Paragraph 4.4.2.1.1.2.     c.   Destination reference: as in IS 8073.     d.   Source reference: this reference shall be selected pursuant to          the provisions of Paragraph 5.2.1.     e.   Class and option: the class field shall take binary value          0010; the option field shall take binary value 0010. (These          values select Class 2, and the options of extended formats and          flow control in Class 2.)4.4.2.1.1.2   Variable part of header.     a.   TSAP identifiers: the parameter values shall follow the          conventions given in Paragraphs 5.1.1 and 5.1.2.     b.   TPDU size: (The values to be used are under consideration.)     c.   Version number: as in IS 8073.     d.   Protection parameters: should not be used.     e.   Checksum: shall not be used.     f.   Additional options: this field shall take binary value 0001 if          the initiating user has proposed the use of expedited data,          and shall take value 0000 otherwise.McCoy                                                          [Page 14]

RFC 1007                                                       June 1987     g.   Alternative protocol classes: this field shall not be used          unless Class 0 is to be proposed as an alternate class of          operation.     h.   Throughput: should not be used.     i.   Residual error rate: should not be used.     j.   Priority: (Use of this parameter is under consideration.)     k.   Transit delay: should not be used.4.4.2.1.1.3  User data.   The CR TPDU shall not carry user data which has any requirement   whatever for security protection.4.4.2.1.2   Connect Confirm (CC) TPDU.4.4.2.1.2.1   Fixed part of header.     a.   Connect confirm code: as in IS 8073.     b.   Initial credit allocation: same as Paragraph 4.4.2.1.1.1.     c.   Destination reference: this reference shall be the "Source          reference" number from the received CR TPDU.     d.   Source reference: this reference shall be selected pursuant to          the provisions of Paragraph 5.2.1.     e.   Class and option: the class field shall take binary value 0010          and the option field shall take binary value  0010 (selects          Class 2 and options of extended formats and flow control in          Class 2).4.4.2.1.2.2   Variable part of header.     a.   TSAP identifier(s): the parameter values shall follow the          conventions given in Paragraphs 5.1.1 and 5.1.2.     b.   b. TPDU size: (The values for this parameter are under          consideration.)     c.   Version number: as in  IS 8073.     d.   Protection parameters: should not be used.McCoy                                                          [Page 15]

RFC 1007                                                       June 1987     e.   Checksum : shall not be used.     f.   Additional options: This field shall take binary value 0001 if          the responding transport entity has proposed the use of          expedited data, and shall take binary value 0000 otherwise.     g.   Alternative protocol classes: shall not be used.     h.   Throughput: should not be used.     i.   Residual error rate: should not be used.     j.   Priority: (The use of this parameter is under consideration.)     k.   Transit delay: should not be used.4.4.2.1.2.3   User data.     The CC TPDU shall not carry any data which has any requirement     whatever for security protection.4.4.2.2   Class 4 parameters.4.4.2.2.1  Connect request (CR) TPDU.4.4.2.2.1.1   Fixed part of header.     a.   Connect request code: as in IS 8073.     b.   Initial credit allocation: this field defines the number of          TPDUs offered as initial credit by the connection initiator.          Since the field is of length 4, the maximum credit that can be          initially offered is limited to 15. These TPDUs are          constrained in length to the maximum size defined in the TPDU          size field, listed below in Paragraph 4.4.2.2.1.2.     c.   Destination reference: as in  IS 8073.     d.   Source reference: this reference shall be selected pursuant to          the provisions of Paragaph 5.2.1.     e.   Class and option: the class field shall take binary value          0100; the option field shall take binary value 0010. (These          values select Class 4, and the options  of extended formats          and flow control in Class 2.  This latter option is ignored if          the class negotiated is Class 2.)McCoy                                                          [Page 16]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19874.4.2.2.1.2   Variable part of header.     a.   TSAP identifiers: the parameter values shall follow the          conventions given in Paragraphs 5.1.1 and 5.1.2.     b.   PDU size: (The values for this parameter are under          consideration.)     c.   Version number: as in IS 8073.     d.   Protection parameters: should not be used.     e.   Checksum: if Class 4 has been selected, this parameter may be          used.  If Class 2 (or Class) has been selected, this parameter          shall not be used.     f.   Additional options: this field shall take binary value 0001 if          the initiating user has proposed the use of expedited data,          and shall take binary value 0000 otherwise.     g.   Alternative protocol classes: this field shall be used only if          Class 2 (or Class 0) is to be proposed as an alternate class          of operation, conformant to the conditions of Paragraph          4.4.1.1.  If Class 2 is proposed, the field shall take binary          value 00000010 (1 octet).     h.   Acknowledge time:  should not be used.     i.   Throughput: should not be used.     j.   Residual error rate: (The use of this parameter is under          consideration.)     k.   Priority: (The use of this parameter is under consideration.)     l.   Transit delay: should not be used.4.4.2.2.1.3   User data.     The CR TPDU shall not carry user data which has any requirement     whatever for security protection.4.4.2.2.2   Connect confirm (CC) TPDU.4.4.2.2.2.1   Fixed part of header.     a.   Connect confirm code: as in IS 8073.     b.   Initial credit allocation: same as Paragraph 4.4.2.2.1.1.b.McCoy                                                          [Page 17]

RFC 1007                                                       June 1987     c.   Destination reference: this reference shall be the number in          "Source reference" from the received CR TPDU.     d.   Source reference: this reference shall be selected pursuant to          the provisions of Paragraph 5.2.1.     e.   Class and option: if Class 2 has been selected, then the class          field shall take binary value 0010 and the option field shall          take binary value 0010.  If Class 4 has been selected, then          the class field shall take binary value 0100 and the option          field shall take binary value 0010.4.4.2.2.1.2  Variable part of header.     a.   TSAP identifier(s): the parameters values shall follow the          conventions given in Paragraphs 5.1.1 and 5.1.2.     b.   TPDU size: (The values for this parameter are under          consideration.)     c.   Version number: as in IS 8073.     d.   Protection parameters: should not be used.     e.   Checksum: if Class 4 has been selected, this parameter may be          used. If Class 2 (or Class 0) has been selected, this          parameter shall not be used.     f.   Additional options: if Class 4 or Class 2 has been selected,          this field shall take binary value 0001 if the responding user          has proposed use of expedited data and shall take binary value          0000 otherwise.     g.   Alternate protocol classes: shall not be used.     h.   Acknowledgement time: should not be used.     i.   Throughput: should not be used.     j.   Residual error rate: (The use of this parameter is under          consideration.)     k.   Priority: (The use of this parameter is under consideration.)     l.   Transit delay: should not be used.4.4.2.2.1.3   User data.   The CC TPDU shall not carry user data which has any requirement   whatever for security protection.McCoy                                                          [Page 18]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19874.5   Use of local options.   The paragraphs that follow give policy and guidance in the election   of local options.4.5.1   Local options, Class 2.4.5.1.1   Multiplexing.   Any Class 2 connections may be multiplexed on the same network   connection to the limits provided by the network service.   Multiplexing Class 2 and Class 4 connections together on the same   network connection is not recommended.4.5.1.2   Acknowledgement strategy.   (The provisions of this paragraph are under consideration.)4.5.1.3   Concatenation.   This permits placing certain TPDUs into a single network service   data unit with a data-bearing TPDU.  It is useful for reducing   the overhead of separate transmission of the individual TPDUs.4.5.1.4   Lockup prevention timer.   It is strongly recommended that this timer be used for all Class 2   connections.  A description of the timer has been included in the   transport formal description.  (This timer corresponds to the   optional TS1 timer that IS 8073 recommends.)4.5.1.5   Treatment of protocol errors.   Protocol errors detected by a Class 2 transport connection shall   result in that connection being terminated, without sending an ER   TPDU.4.5.1.6   Action on receipt of Error transport protocol data unit.   The receipt of an ER TPDU for a Class 2 transport connection shall   cause immediate termination of that transport connection.4.5.2   Local options, Class 4.4.5.2.1   Withdrawal of flow control credit.   Because of the need to serve transport connections of various   levels of operating priority, an implementation shall support   the withdrawal of flow control credit from any Class 4 transport   connection as a means of managing resource allocation among   Class 4 connections.McCoy                                                          [Page 19]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19874.5.2.2   Flow control confirmation.   The requirement to support withdrawal of flow control credit   strongly indicates the need to use flow control confirmation.   An implementation should support and use the flow control   confirmation procedures of IS 8073, consistent with quality of   service and other requirements.4.5.2.3   Subsequenced acknowledgements.   The possibility of credit withdrawal strongly indicates the   requirement for subsequence numbers on acknowledgements.  An   implementation shall support and use subsequence numbers as   defined in IS 8073.4.5.2.4   Splitting over network connection.   Implementations may use splitting as necessary or useful in the   operating environment. (Splitting is defined only for operation   over a CONS.4.5.2.5   Acknowledgement strategy.   (The provisions of this paragraph are under consideration.)4.5.2.6   Wait-before-closing state.   It is recommended that this state be used.  A lockup prevention   timer, such as used in Class 2, is not necessary, since the CR   TPDU retransmission timer serves this purpose.4.5.2.7   Multiplexing on network connection.   Multiplexing of Class 4 connections on a single network   connection may be used as necessary or useful, within the limits   permitted by the network service.  Class 4 connections should not   be multiplexed onto network connections serving Class 2 transport   connections.4.5.2.8   Concatenation of protocol data units.   Concatenation may be useful when operating over a CLNS that has   large capacity service data units.  Concatenation on networks   that areconnection-oriented may be useful if transport   connections are being multiplexed.  A careful analysis of the   treatment of the network service data unit in internetwork   environments should be done to determine whether concatenation   of TPDUs provides sufficient benefit to justify its usage in   those circumstances.McCoy                                                          [Page 20]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19874.5.2.9   Checksum algorithm.   It is strongly recommended that the algorithm described in the   Implementors Guide Part 7, be used rather than the algorithm   given in the Annex to IS 8073.  The algorithm in  Part 7   computes the same checksum as the one in IS 8073 but  has been   optimized.  Guidance on the use and non-use of  checksum is   given in the Implementors Guide, Part 7.4.5.2.10   Send network RESET when bad checksum received.   It is recommended that only an N-RESET be sent when encountering   a TPDU with a bad checksum on a CONS.  An implementation shall   not send an N-DISCONNECT-request in such situations, since the   TPDU with the bad checksum may have come from some entity   intending to interfere with communications.  When  operating   Class 4 over a CLNS, no action shall be taken on the receipt of   a TPDU with a bad checksum,  i.e., the TPDU shall be discarded.4.5.2.11   Protocol data unit retransmission policy.   (The provisions of this paragraph are under consideration.)4.5.2.12   Treatment of protocol errors.   In Class 4, a protocol error arising from a TPDU containing   unrecognized parameters shall cause a DR TPDU to be sent to the   sender, if the TPDU is otherwise valid.  All other erroneous TPDUs   shall be discarded.4.5.2.13   Action on receipt of Error transport protocol data unit.   If an ER TPDU is received from a remote transport entity, an   implementation to which this supplement applies shall release the   transport connection with which the ER TPDU is associated, if such   association can be made.  When association cannot be made, the ER   TPDU shall be discarded.5. SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS5.1   Addressing conventions.   (The provisions of Paragraph 5.1 and its subparagraphs are under   consideration.)5.1.1   Transport Service Access Point.5.1.2   Connect-request/confirm protocol data units.5.1.3   Network Service Access Point.McCoy                                                          [Page 21]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19875.2   Convention for use of transport connection reference numbers.   The ISO Transport Protocol provides for freezing reference numbers   by means of a timer, so that re-use of a reference number does not   cause ambiguity in communications. However, certain requirements   are imposed on DOD implementations, so that this means of reference   number control is inadequate alone. The ISO standard defines only   those actions to be followed if a timer is used.  Other means of   reference number control are not prohibited, providing that the   minimum freeze time, as defined in IS 8073, is exceeded for each   reference number used.5.2.1   Specification of convention.   An implementation adhering to the applications definitions in   this supplement, Paragraph 1.3, shall not re-use a transport   connection reference number until the set of available reference   numbers has recycled to that point.  Expressed more formally,   if all reference numbers are defined to be within the interval   [1,N] and a reference number R in this interval is used, then   R shall be prohibited from being selected again until all the   numbers R+1,...,N,1,2,...,R-1 shall have been used.  The choice   of N should be sufficiently large that the expected recycle period   exceeds the minimum freeze time as specified in IS 8073.  This   requirement is in addition to and does not supersede the freeze   requirement of IS 8073.  A simple means of implementing this   convention is given in Part 9.3 of the Implementors Guide.5.3  Operation over connectionless network service.   Implementations to which this supplement applies are required to   operate over connectionless network services in addition to being   able to operate over connection-oriented network services. The ISO   standard specifies transport only for operation over a   connection-oriented network.  However, the specification for Class   4 has been written in such a way that use with connectionless   network service is not precluded.  The formal description offers   even more flexibility in this regard.  Consequently, operation over   connectionless network services, whether a LAN or IP, is primarily   an implementation issue for Class 4.  Operation of Class 2   transportover a connectionless network service is not considered   to be a reasonable  option because of the lack of sufficent error   recovery in Class 2.   For the purposes of this supplement,   operation of Class 2 on a  connectionless network service is   not recommended. Operation of Class  4  over a connectionless   network service is discussed further in parts 1.2.2.2,  3.4,   and 6 of the accompanying Implementors Guide.McCoy                                                          [Page 22]

RFC 1007                                                       June 19875.4   Recovery from peer deactivation.   The ISO Standard does not provide for re-establishment of the   transport connection  when one of the communicating peers is   deactivated ("crashes").  However, the state tables for Class   4 transport in Annex A to IS 8073  are flexible enough that   simple adaptations in an implementation can yield some degree   of crash recovery without change to the protocol.  These   adaptations are discussed in Part 9.2 of the Implementors Guide.McCoy                                                          [Page 23]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp