分享
 
 
 

RFC1172 - Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) initial configuration options

王朝other·作者佚名  2008-05-31
窄屏简体版  字體: |||超大  

Request for Comments: 1172 CMU

R. Hobby

UC Davis

July 1990

The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) Initial Configuration Options

Status of this Memo

This RFCspecifies an IAB standards track protocol for the Internet

community.

Please refer to the current edition of the "IAB Official Protocol

Standards" for the standardization state and status of this protocol.

This proposal is the product of the Point-to-Point Protocol Working

Group of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Comments on

this memo should be submitted to the IETF Point-to-Point Protocol

Working Group chair.

Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Abstract

The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) provides a method for transmitting

datagrams over serial point-to-point links. PPP is composed of

1) a method for encapsulating datagrams over serial links,

2) an extensible Link Control Protocol (LCP), and

3) a family of Network Control Protocols (NCP) for establishing

and configuring different network-layer protocols.

The PPP encapsulating scheme, the basic LCP, and an NCP for

controlling and establishing the Internet Protocol (IP) (called the

IP Control Protocol, IPCP) are defined in The Point-to-Point Protocol

(PPP) [1].

This document defines the intial options used by the LCP and IPCP. It

also defines a method of Link Quality Monitoring and a simple

authentication scheme.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction .......................................... 1

2. Link Control Protocol (LCP) Configuration Options ..... 1

2.1 Maximum-Receive-Unit ............................ 2

2.2 Async-Control-Character-Map ..................... 3

2.3 Authentication-Type ............................. 5

2.4 Magic-Number .................................... 7

2.5 Link-Quality-Monitoring ......................... 10

2.6 Protocol-Field-Compression ...................... 11

2.7 Address-and-Control-Field-Compression ........... 13

3. Link Quality Monitoring ............................... 15

3.1 Design Motivation ............................... 15

3.2 Design Overview ................................. 15

3.3 Processes ....................................... 16

3.4 Counters ........................................ 18

3.5 Measurements, Calculations, State Variables ..... 19

3.6 Link-Quality-Report Packet Format ............... 21

3.7 Policy Suggestions .............................. 25

3.8 Example ......................................... 25

4. PassWord Authentication Protocol ...................... 27

4.1 Packet Format ................................... 27

4.2 Authenticate .................................... 29

4.3 Authenticate-Ack ................................ 31

4.4 Authenticate-Nak ................................ 32

5. IP Control Protocol (IPCP) Configuration Options ...... 33

5.1 IP-Addresses .................................... 34

5.2 Compression-Type ................................ 36

REFERENCES ................................................... 37

SECURITY CONSIDERATIONS ...................................... 37

AUTHOR'S ADDRESS ............................................. 37

1. Introduction

The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) [1] proposes a standard method of

encapsulating IP datagrams, and other Network Layer protocol

information, over point-to-point links. PPP also proposes an

extensible Option Negotiation Protocol. [1] specifies only the

protocol itself; the initial set of Configuration Options are

described in this document. These Configuration Options allow MTUs

to be changed, IP addresses to be dynamically assigned, header

compression to be enabled, and much more.

This memo is divided into several sections. Section 2 describes

Configuration Options for the Link Control Protocol. Section 3

specifies the use of the Link Quality Monitoring option. Section 4

defines a simple Password Authentication Protocol. Finally, Section 5

specifies Configuration Options for the IP Control Protocol.

2. Link Control Protocol (LCP) Configuration Options

As described in [1], LCP Configuration Options allow modifications to

the standard characteristics of a point-to-point link to be

negotiated. Negotiable modifications proposed in this document

include such things as the maximum receive unit, async control

character mapping, the link authentication method, etc.

The initial proposed values for the LCP Configuration Option Type

field (see [1]) are assigned as follows:

1 Maximum-Receive-Unit

2 Async-Control-Character-Map

3 Authentication-Type

4 NOT ASSIGNED

5 Magic-Number

6 Link-Quality-Monitoring

7 Protocol-Field-Compression

8 Address-and-Control-Field-Compression

2.1. Maximum-Receive-Unit

Description

This Configuration Option provides a way to negotiate the maximum

packet size used across one direction of a link. By default, all

implementations must be able to receive frames with 1500 octets of

Information.

This Configuration Option may be sent to inform the remote end

that you can receive larger frames, or to request that the remote

end send you smaller frames. If smaller frames are requested, an

implementation MUST still be able to receive 1500 octet frames in

case link synchronization is lost.

A summary of the Maximum-Receive-Unit Configuration Option format is

shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to right.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type Length Maximum-Receive-Unit

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type

1

Length

4

Maximum-Receive-Unit

The Maximum-Receive-Unit field is two octets and indicates the new

maximum receive unit. The Maximum-Receive-Unit covers only the

Data Link Layer Information field but not the header, trailer or

any transparency bits or bytes.

Default

1500

2.2. Async-Control-Character-Map

Description

This Configuration Option provides a way to negotiate the use of

control character mapping on asynchronous links. By default, PPP

maps all control characters into an appropriate two character

sequence. However, it is rarely necessary to map all control

characters and often times it is unnecessary to map any

characters. A PPP implementation may use this Configuration

Option to inform the remote end which control characters must

remain mapped and which control characters need not remain mapped

when the remote end sends them. The remote end may still send

these control characters in mapped format if it is necessary

because of constraints at its (the remote) end. This option does

not solve problems for communications links that can send only 7-

bit characters or that can not send all non-control characters.

There may be some use of synchronous-to-asynchronous converters

(some built into modems) in Point-to-point links resulting in a

synchronous PPP implementation on one end of a link and an

asynchronous implemention on the other. It is the responsibility

of the converter to do all mapping conversions during operation.

To enable this functionality, synchronous PPP implementations MUST

always accept a Async-Control-Character-Map Configuration Option

(it MUST always respond to an LCP Configure-Request specifying

this Configuration Option with an LCP Configure-Ack). However,

acceptance of this Configuration Option does not imply that the

synchronous implementation will do any character mapping, since

synchronous PPP uses bit-stuffing rather than character-stuffing.

Instead, all such character mapping will be performed by the

asynchronous-to-synchronous converter.

A summary of the Async-Control-Character-Map Configuration Option

format is shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to

right.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type Length Async-Control-Character-Map

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

(cont)

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type

2

Length

6

Async-Control-Character-Map

The Async-Control-Character-Map field is four octets and indicates

the new async control character map. The map is encoded in big-

endian fashion where each numbered bit corresponds to the ASCII

control character of the same value. If the bit is cleared to

zero, then that ASCII control character need not be mapped. If

the bit is set to one, then that ASCII control character must

remain mapped. E.g., if bit 19 is set to zero, then the ASCII

control character 19 (DC3, Control-S) may be sent in the clear.

Default

All ones (0xffffffff).

2.3. Authentication-Type

Description

On some links it may be desirable to require a peer to

authenticate itself before allowing Network Layer protocol data to

be exchanged. This Configuration Option provides a way to

negotiate the use of a specific authentication protocol. By

default, authentication is not necessary. If an implementation

requires that the remote end authenticate with some specific

authentication protocol, then it should negotiate the use of that

authentication protocol with this Configuration Option.

Successful negotiation of the Authentication-Type option adds an

additional Authentication phase to the Link Control Protocol.

This phase is after the Link Quality Determination phase, and

before the Network Layer Protocol Configuration Negotiation phase.

Advancement from the Authentication phase to the Network Layer

Protocol Configuration Negotiation phase may not occur until the

peer is successfully authenticated using the negotiated

authentication protocol.

An implementation may allow the remote end to pick from more than

one authentication protocol. To achieve this, it may include

multiple Authentication-Type Configuration Options in its

Configure-Request packets. An implementation receiving a

Configure-Request specifying multiple Authentication-Types may

accept at most one of the negotiable authentication protocols and

should send a Configure-Reject specifying all of the other

specified authentication protocols.

It is recommended that each PPP implementation support

configuration of authentication parameters at least on a per-

interface basis, if not a per peer entity basis. The parameters

should specify which authetication techniques are minimally

required as a prerequisite to establishment of a PPP connection,

either for the specified interface or for the specified peer

entity. Such configuration facilities are necessary to prevent an

attacker from negotiating a reduced security authentication

protocol, or no authentication at all, in an attempt to circumvent

this authentication facility.

If an implementation sends a Configure-Ack with this Configuration

Option, then it is agreeing to authenticate with the specified

protocol. An implementation receiving a Configure-Ack with this

Configuration Option should eXPect the remote end to authenticate

with the acknowledged protocol.

There is no requirement that authentication be full duplex or that

the same authentication protocol be used in both directions. It

is perfectly acceptable for different authentication protocols to

be used in each direction. This will, of course, depend on the

specific authentication protocols negotiated.

This document defines a simple Password Authentication Protocol in

Section 4. Development of other more secure protocols is

encouraged.

A summary of the Authentication-Type Configuration Option format is

shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to right.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type Length Authentication-Type

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Data ...

+-+-+-+-+

Type

3

Length

>= 4

Authentication-Type

The Authentication-Type field is two octets and indicates the type

of authentication protocol desired. Values for the

Authentication-Type are always the same as the PPP Data Link Layer

Protocol field values for that same authentication protocol. The

most up-to-date values of the Authentication-Type field are

specified in "Assigned Numbers" [2]. Initial values are assigned

as follows:

Value (in hex) Protocol

c023 Password Authentication Protocol

Data

The Data field is zero or more octets and contains additional data

as determined by the particular authentication protocol.

Default

No authentication protocol necessary.

2.4. Magic-Number

Description

This Configuration Option provides a way to detect looped-back

links and other Data Link Layer anomalies. This Configuration

Option may be required by some other Configuration Options such as

the Link-Quality-Monitoring Configuration Option.

Before this Configuration Option is requested, an implementation

must choose its Magic-Number. It is recommended that the Magic-

Number be chosen in the most random manner possible in order to

guarantee with very high probability that an implementation will

arrive at a unique number. A good way to choose a unique random

number is to start with an unique seed. Suggested sources of

uniqueness include machine serial numbers, other network hardware

addresses, time-of-day clocks, etc. Particularly good random

number seeds are precise measurements of the inter-arrival time of

physical events such as packet reception on other connected

networks, server response time, or the typing rate of a human

user. It is also suggested that as many sources as possible be

used simultaneously.

When a Configure-Request is received with a Magic-Number

Configuration Option, the received Magic-Number should be compared

with the Magic-Number of the last Configure-Request sent to the

peer. If the two Magic-Numbers are different, then the link is

not looped-back, and the Magic-Number should be acknowledged. If

the two Magic-Numbers are equal, then it is possible, but not

certain, that the link is looped-back and that this Configure-

Request is actually the one last sent. To determine this, a

Configure-Nak should be sent specifying a different Magic-Number

value. A new Configure-Request should not be sent to the peer

until normal processing would cause it to be sent (i.e., until a

Configure-Nak is received or the Restart timer runs out).

Reception of a Configure-Nak with a Magic-Number different from

that of the last Configure-Nak sent to the peer proves that a link

is not looped-back, and indicates a unique Magic-Number. If the

Magic-Number is equal to the one sent in the last Configure-Nak,

the possibility of a loop-back is increased, and a new Magic-

Number should be chosen. In either case, a new Configure-Request

should be sent with the new Magic-Number.

If the link is indeed looped-back, this sequence (transmit

Configure-Request, receive Configure-Request, transmit Configure-

Nak, receive Configure-Nak) will repeat over and over again. If

the link is not looped-back, this sequence may occur a few times,

but it is extremely unlikely to occur repeatedly. More likely,

the Magic-Numbers chosen at either end will quickly diverge,

terminating the sequence. The following table shows the

probability of collisions assuming that both ends of the link

select Magic-Numbers with a perfectly uniform distribution:

Number of Collisions Probability

-------------------- ---------------------

1 1/2**32 = 2.3 E-10

2 1/2**32**2 = 5.4 E-20

3 1/2**32**3 = 1.3 E-29

Good sources of uniqueness or randomness are required for this

divergence to occur. If a good source of uniqueness cannot be

found, it is recommended that this Configuration Option not be

enabled; Configure-Requests with the option should not be

transmitted and any Magic-Number Configuration Options which the

peer sends should be either acknowledged or rejected. In this

case, loop-backs cannot be reliably detected by the

implementation, although they may still be detectable by the peer.

If an implementation does transmit a Configure-Request with a

Magic-Number Configuration Option, then it MUST NOT respond with a

Configure-Reject if its peer also transmits a Configure-Request

with a Magic-Number Configuration Option. That is, if an

implementation desires to use Magic Numbers, then it MUST also

allow its peer to do so. If an implementation does receive a

Configure-Reject in response to a Configure-Request, it can only

mean that the link is not looped-back, and that its peer will not

be using Magic-Numbers. In this case, an implementation may act

as if the negotiation had been successful (as if it had instead

received a Configure-Ack).

The Magic-Number also may be used to detect looped-back links

during normal operation as well as during Configuration Option

negotiation. All Echo-Request, Echo-Reply, Discard-Request, and

Link-Quality-Report LCP packets have a Magic-Number field which

MUST normally be transmitted as zero, and MUST normally be ignored

on reception. However, once a Magic-Number has been successfully

negotiated, an LCP implementation MUST begin transmitting these

packets with the Magic-Number field set to its negotiated Magic-

Number. Additionally, the Magic-Number field of these packets may

be inspected on reception. All received Magic-Number fields should

be equal to either zero or the peer's unique Magic-Number,

depending on whether or not the peer negotiated one. Reception of

a Magic-Number field equal to the negotiated local Magic-Number

indicates a looped-back link. Reception of a Magic-Number other

than the negotiated local Magic-Number or or the peer's negotiated

Magic-Number, or zero if the peer didn't negotiate one, indicates

a link which has been (mis)configured for communications with a

different peer.

Procedures for recovery from either case are unspecified and may

vary from implementation to implementation. A somewhat

pessimistic procedure is to assume an LCP Physical-Layer-Down

event and make an immediate transition to the Closed state. A

further Active-Open event will begin the process of re-

establishing the link, which can't complete until the loop-back

condition is terminated and Magic-Numbers are successfully

negotiated. A more optimistic procedure (in the case of a loop-

back) is to begin transmitting LCP Echo-Request packets until an

appropriate Echo-Reply is received, indicating a termination of

the loop-back condition.

A summary of the Magic-Number Configuration Option format is shown

below. The fields are transmitted from left to right.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type Length Magic-Number

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Magic-Number (cont)

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type

5

Length

6

Magic-Number

The Magic-Number field is four octets and indicates a number which

is very likely to be unique to one end of the link. A Magic-

Number of zero is illegal and must not be sent.

Default

None.

2.5. Link-Quality-Monitoring

Description

On some links it may be desirable to determine when, and how

often, the link is dropping data. This process is called Link

Quality Monitoring and is implemented by periodically transmitting

Link-Quality-Report packets as described in Section 3. The Link-

Quality-Monitoring Configuration Option provides a way to enable

the use of Link-Quality-Report packets, and also to negotiate the

rate at which they are transmitted. By default, Link Quality

Monitoring and the use of Link-Quality-Report packets is disabled.

A summary of the Link-Quality-Monitoring Configuration Option format

is shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to right.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type Length Reporting-Period

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Reporting-Period (cont)

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type

6

Length

6

Reporting-Period

The Reporting-Period field is four octets and indicates the

maximum time in micro-seconds that the remote end should wait

between transmission of LCP Link-Quality-Report packets. A value

of zero is illegal and should always be nak'd or rejected. An LCP

implementation is always free to transmit LCP Link-Quality-Report

packets at a faster rate than that which was requested by, and

acknowledged to, the remote end.

Default

None

2.6. Protocol-Field-Compression

Description

This Configuration Option provides a way to negotiate the

compression of the Data Link Layer Protocol field. By default,

all implementations must transmit standard PPP frames with two

octet Protocol fields. However, PPP Protocol field numbers are

chosen such that some values may be compressed into a single octet

form which is clearly distinguishable from the two octet form.

This Configuration Option may be sent to inform the remote end

that you can receive compressed single octet Protocol fields.

Compressed Protocol fields may not be transmitted unless this

Configuration Option has been received.

As previously mentioned, the Protocol field uses an extension

mechanism consistent with the ISO 3309 extension mechanism for the

Address field; the Least Significant Bit (LSB) of each octet is

used to indicate extension of the Protocol field. A binary "0" as

the LSB indicates that the Protocol field continues with the

following octet. The presence of a binary "1" as the LSB marks

the last octet of the Protocol field. Notice that any number of

"0" octets may be prepended to the field, and will still indicate

the same value (consider the two representations for 3, 00000011

and 00000000 00000011).

In the interest of simplicity, the standard PPP frame uses this

fact and always sends Protocol fields with a two octet

representation. Protocol field values less than 256 (decimal) are

prepended with a single zero octet even though transmission of

this, the zero and most significant octet, is unnecessary.

However, when using low speed links, it is desirable to conserve

bandwidth by sending as little redundant data as possible. The

Protocol Compression Configuration Option allows a trade-off

between implementation simplicity and bandwidth efficiency. If

successfully negotiated, the ISO 3309 extension mechanism may be

used to compress the Protocol field to one octet instead of two.

The large majority of frames are compressible since data protocols

are typically assigned with Protocol field values less than 256.

To guarantee unambiguous recognition of LCP packets, the Protocol

field must never be compressed when sending any LCP packet. In

addition, PPP implementations must continue to be robust and MUST

accept PPP frames with double-octet, as well as single-octet,

Protocol fields, and MUST NOT distinguish between them.

When a Protocol field is compressed, the Data Link Layer FCS field

is calculated on the compressed frame, not the original

uncompressed frame.

A summary of the Protocol-Field-Compression Configuration Option

format is shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to

right.

0 1

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type Length

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type

7

Length

2

Default

Disabled.

2.7. Address-and-Control-Field-Compression

Description

This Configuration Option provides a way to negotiate the

compression of the Data Link Layer Address and Control fields. By

default all implementations must transmit frames with Address and

Control fields and must use the hexadecimal values 0xff and 0x03

respectively. Since these fields have constant values, they are

easily compressed. this Configuration Option may be used to

inform the remote end that you can receive compressed Address and

Control fields.

Compressed Address and Control fields are formed by simply

omitting them in all non-ambiguous cases. Ambiguous frames may

not be compressed. Ambiguous cases result when the two octets

following the Address and Control fields have values that could be

interpreted as valid Address and Control fields (i.e., 0xff,

0x03). This can happen when Protocol-Field-Compression is enabled

and the Protocol field is compressed to one octet. If the

Protocol value is 0xff, and the first octet of the Information

field is 0x03, the result is ambiguous and the Address and Control

fields must not be compressed on transmission.

On reception, the Address and Control fields are decompressed by

examining the first two octets. If they contain the values 0xff

and 0x03, they are assumed to be the Address and Control fields.

If not, it is assumed that the fields were compressed and were not

transmitted.

One additional case in which the Address and Control fields must

never be compressed is when sending any LCP packet. This rule

guarantees unambiguous recognition of LCP packets.

When the Address and Control fields are compressed, the Data Link

Layer FCS field is calculated on the compressed frame, not the

original uncompressed frame.

A summary of the Address-and-Control-Field-Compression configuration

option format is shown below. The fields are transmitted from left

to right.

0 1

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type Length

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type

8

Length

2

Default

Not compressed.

3. Link Quality Monitoring

Data communications links are rarely perfect. Packets can be dropped

or corrupted for various reasons (line noise, equipment failure,

buffer overruns, etc.). Sometimes, it is desirable to determine

when, and how often, the link is dropping data. Routers, for

example, may want to temporarily allow another route to take

precedence. An implementation may also have the option of

disconnecting and switching to an alternate link. The process of

determining data loss is called "Link Quality Monitoring".

3.1. Design Motivation

There are many different ways to measure link quality, and even more

ways to react to it. Rather than specifying a single scheme, Link

Quality Monitoring is divided into a "mechanism" and a "policy". PPP

fully specifies the "mechanism" for Link Quality Monitoring by

defining the LCP Link-Quality-Report (LQR) packet and specifying a

procedure for its use. PPP does NOT specify a Link Quality

Monitoring "policy" -- how to judge link quality or what to do when

it is inadequate. That is left as an implementation decision, and

can be different at each end of the link. Implementations are

allowed, and even encouraged, to experiment with various link quality

policies. The Link Quality Monitoring mechanism specification

insures that two implementations with different policies may

communicate and interoperate.

To allow flexible policies to be implemented, the PPP Link Quality

Monitoring mechanism measures data loss in units of packets, octets,

and Link-Quality-Reports. Each measurement is made separately for

each half of the link, both inbound and outbound. All measurements

are communicated to both ends of the link so that each end of the

link can implement its own link quality policy for both its outbound

and inbound links.

Finally, the Link Quality Monitoring protocol is designed to be

implementable on many different kinds of systems. Although it may be

common to implement PPP (and especially Link Quality Monitoring) as a

single software process, multi-process implementations with hardware

support are also envisioned. The PPP Link Quality Monitoring

mechanism provides for this by careful definition of the Link-

Quality-Report packet format, and by specifiying reference points for

all data transmission and reception measurements.

3.2. Design Overview

Each Link Quality Monitoring implementation maintains counts of the

number of packets and octets transmitted and successfully received,

and periodically transmits this information to its peer in a Link-

Quality-Report packet. These packets contain three sections: a

Header section, a Counters section, and a Measurements section.

The Header section of the packet consists of the normal LCP Link

Maintenance packet header including Code, Identifier, Length and

Magic-Number fields.

The Counters section of the packet consists of four counters, and

provides the information necessary to measure the quality of the

link. The LQR transmitter fills in two of these counters: Out-Tx-

Packets-Ctr and Out-Tx-Octets-Ctr (described later). The LQR

receiver fills in the two remaining counters: In-Rx-Packets-Ctr and

In-Rx-Octets-Ctr (described later). These counters are similar to

sequence numbers; they are constantly increasing to give a "relative"

indication of the number of packets and octets communicated across

the outbound link. By comparing the values in successive Link-

Quality-Reports, an LQR receiver can compute the "absolute" number of

packets and octets communicated across its inbound link. Comparing

these absolute numbers then gives an indication of an inbound link's

quality. Relative numbers, rather than absolute, are transmitted

because they greatly simplify link synchronization; an implementation

merely waits to receive two LQR packets.

The Measurements section of the packet consists of six state

variables: In-Tx-LQRs, Last-In-Id, In-Tx-Packets, In-Tx-Octets, In-

Rx-Packets, and In-Rx-Octets (described later). This section allows

an implementation to report inbound link quality measurements to its

peer (for which the report will instead indicate outbound link

quality) by transmitting the absolute, rather than relative, number

of LQRs, packets, and octets communicated across the inbound link.

These values are calculated by observing the Counters section of the

Link-Quality-Report packets received on the inbound link. Absolute

numbers may be used in this section without synchronization problems

because it is necessary to receive only one LQR packet to have valid

information.

Link Quality Monitoring is described in more detail in the following

sections. First, a description of the processes comprising the Link

Quality Monitoring mechanism is presented. This is followed by the

packet and byte counters maintained; the measurements, calculations,

and state variables used; the format of the Link-Quality-Report

packet; some policy suggestions; and, finally, an example link

quality calculation.

3.3. Processes

The PPP Link Quality Monitoring mechanism is described using a

"logical process" model. As shown below, there are five logical

processes duplicated at each end of the duplex link.

+---------+ +-------+ +----+ Outbound

--> Mux --> Tx =========>

Link- +-------+ +----+

Manager

+-------+ +----+ Inbound

<-- Demux <-- Rx <=========

+---------+ +-------+ +----+

Link-Manager

The Link-Manager process transmits and receives Link-Quality-

Reports, and implements the desired link quality policy. LQR

packets are transmitted at a constant rate, which is negotiated by

the LCP Link-Quality-Monitoring Configuration Option. The Link-

Manager process fills in only the Header and Measurements sections

of the packet; the Counters section of the packet is filled in by

the Tx and Rx processes.

Mux

The Mux process multiplexes packets from the various protocols

(e.g., LCP, IP, XNS, etc.) into a single, sequential, and

prioritized stream of packets. Link-Quality-Report packets MUST

be given the highest possible priority to insure that link quality

information is communicated in a timely manner.

Tx

The Tx process maintains the counters Out-Tx-Packets-Ctr and Out-

Tx-Octets-Ctr which are used to measure the amount of data which

is transmitted on the outbound link. When Tx processes a Link-

Quality-Report packet, it inserts the values of these counters

into the Counters section of the packet. Because these counters

represent relative, rather than absolute, values, the question of

when to update the counters, before or after they are inserted

into a Link-Quality-Report packet, is left as an implementation

decision. However, an implementation MUST make this decision the

same way every time. The Tx process MUST follow the Mux process

so that packets are counted in the order transmitted to the link.

Rx

The Rx process maintains the counters In-Rx-Packets-Ctr and In-

Rx-Octets-Ctr which are used to measure the amount of data which

is received by the inbound link. When Rx processes a Link-

Quality-Report packet, it inserts the values of these counters

into the Counters section of the packet. Again, the question of

when to update the counters, before or after they are inserted

into a Link-Quality-Report packet, is left as an implementation

decision which MUST be made consistently the same way.

Demux

The Demux process demultiplexes packets for the various protocols.

The Demux process MUST follow the Rx process so that packets are

counted in the order received from the link.

3.4. Counters

In order to fill in the Counters section of a Link-Quality-Report

packet, Link Quality Monitoring requires the implementation of one

8-bit unsigned, and four 32-bit unsigned, monotonically increasing

counters. These counters may be reset to any initial value before

the first Link-Quality-Report is transmitted, but MUST NOT be reset

again until LCP has left the Open state. Counters wrap to zero when

their maximum value is reached (for 32 bit counters: 0xffffffff + 1 =

0).

Out-Identifier-Ctr

Out-Identifier-Ctr is an 8-bit counter maintained by the Link-

Manager process which increases by one for each transmitted Link-

Quality-Report packet.

Out-Tx-Packets-Ctr

Out-Tx-Packets-Ctr is a 32-bit counter maintained by the Tx

process which increases by one for each transmitted Data Link

Layer packet.

Out-Tx-Octets-Ctr

Out-Tx-Octets-Ctr is a 32-bit counter maintained by the Tx process

which increases by one for each octet in a transmitted Data Link

Layer packet. All octets which are included in the FCS

calculation MUST be counted, as should the FCS octets themselves.

All other octets MUST NOT be counted.

In-Rx-Packets-Ctr

In-Rx-Packets-Ctr is a 32-bit counter maintained by the Rx process

which increases by one for each successfully received Data Link

Layer packet. Packets with incorrect FCS fields or other problems

MUST not be counted.

In-Rx-Octets-Ctr

In-Rx-Octets-Ctr is a 32-bit counter maintained by the Rx process

which increases by one for each octet in a successfully received

Data Link Layer packet. All octets which are included in an FCS

calculation MUST be counted, as should the FCS octets themselves.

All other octets MUST NOT be counted.

3.5. Measurements, Calculations, State Variables

In order to fill in the Measurements section of a Link-Quality-Report

packet, Link Quality Monitoring requires the Link-Manager process to

make a number of calculations and keep a number of state variables.

These calculations are made, and these state variables updated, each

time a Link-Quality-Report packet is received from the inbound link.

In-Tx-LQRs

In-Tx-LQRs is an 8-bit state variable which indicates the number

of Link-Quality-Report packets which the peer had to transmit in

order for the local end to receive exactly one LQR. In-Tx-LQRs

defines the length of the "period" over which In-Tx-Packets, In-

Tx-Octets, In-Rx-Packets, and In-Rx-Octets were measured. In-Tx-

LQRs is calculated by suBTracting Last-In-Id from the received

Identifier. If more than 255 LQRs in a row are lost, In-Tx-LQRs

will be ambiguous since the Identifier field and all state

variables based on it are only 8 bits. It is assumed that the

Link Quality Monitoring policy will be robust enough to handle

this case (it should probably close down the link long before this

happens).

Last-In-Id

Last-In-Id is an 8-bit state variable which stores the value of

the last received Identifier. Last-In-Id should be updated after

In-Tx-LQRs has been calculated.

In-Tx-Packets

In-Tx-Packets is a 32-bit state variable which indicates the

number of packets which were transmitted on the inbound link

during the last period. In-Tx-Packets is calculated by

subtracting Last-Out-Tx-Packets-Ctr from the received Out-Tx-

Packets-Ctr.

Last-Out-Tx-Packets-Ctr

Last-Out-Tx-Packets-Ctr is a 32-bit state variable which stores

the value of the last received Out-Tx-Packets-Ctr. Last-Out-Tx-

Packets-Ctr should be updated after In-Tx-Packets has been

calculated.

In-Tx-Octets

In-Tx-Octets is a 32-bit state variable which indicates the number

of octets which were transmitted on the inbound link during the

last period. In-Tx-Octets is calculated by subtracting Last-Out-

Tx-Octets-Ctr from the received Out-Tx-Octets-Ctr.

Last-Out-Tx-Octets-Ctr

Last-Out-Tx-Octets-Ctr is a 32-bit state variable which stores the

value of the last received Out-Tx-Octets-Ctr. Last-Out-Tx-

Octets-Ctr should be updated after In-Tx-Octets has been

calculated.

In-Rx-Packets

In-Rx-Packets is a 32-bit state variable which indicates the

number of packets which were received on the inbound link during

the last period. In-Rx-Packets is calculated by subtracting

Last-In-Rx-Packets-Ctr from the received In-Rx-Packets-Ctr.

Last-In-Rx-Packets-Ctr

Last-In-Rx-Packets-Ctr is a 32-bit state variable which stores the

value of the last received In-Rx-Packets-Ctr. Last-In-Rx-

Packets-Ctr should be updated after In-Rx-Packets has been

calculated.

In-Rx-Octets

In-Rx-Octets is a 32-bit state variable which indicates the number

of octets which were received on the inbound link during the last

period. In-Rx-Octets is calculated by subtracting Last-In-Rx-

Octets-Ctr from the received In-Rx-Octets-Ctr.

Last-In-Rx-Octets-Ctr

Last-In-Rx-Octets-Ctr is a 32-bit state variable which stores the

value of the last received In-Rx-Octets-Ctr. Last-In-Rx-Octets-

Ctr should be updated after In-Rx-Octets has been calculated.

Measurements-Valid

Measurements-Valid is a 1-bit boolean state variable which

indicates whether or not the In-Tx-Packets, In-Tx-Octets, In-Rx-

Packets, and In-Rx-Octets state variables contain valid

measurements. These measurements cannot be considered valid until

two or more Link-Quality-Report packets have been received on the

inbound link. This bit should be reset when LCP reaches the Open

state and should be set after the receipt of exactly two LQRs.

3.6. Link-Quality-Report Packet Format

A Summary of the Link-Quality-Report packet format is shown below.

The fields are transmitted from left to right. The Code, Identifier,

Length, and Magic-Number fields make up the normal LCP Link

Maintenance packet header; the In-Tx-LQRS, Last-In-Id, V, In-Tx-

Packets, In-Tx-Octets, In-Rx-Packets, In-Rx-Octets fields contain

digested absolute measurements; and the Out-Tx-Packets-Ctr, Out-Tx-

Octets-Ctr, In-Rx-Packets-Ctr, and In-Rx-Octets-Ctr fields contain

raw relative counts. Note that as transmitted over the link, this

packet format does not include the In-Rx-Packets-Ctr and In-Rx-

Octets-Ctr fields which are logically appended to the packet by the

Rx process after reception on the inbound link.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Code Identifier Length

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Magic-Number

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

In-Tx-LQRs Last-In-Id Reserved V

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

In-Tx-Packets

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

In-Tx-Octets

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

In-Rx-Packets

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

In-Rx-Octets

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Out-Tx-Packets-Ctr

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Out-Tx-Octets-Ctr

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

/

/

/

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

In-Rx-Packets-Ctr

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

In-Rx-Octets-Ctr

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Code

12 for Link-Quality-Report.

Identifier

The Identifier field is one octet and indicates the sequence

number for this Link-Quality-Report. The Identifier field is

copied from the Out-Identifier-Ctr counter on transmission. On

reception, the Identifier field is used to calculate In-Tx-LQRs

and is then stored in Last-In-Id.

The Link-Quality-Report Identifier sequence number space MUST be

separate from that of all other LCP packets; for example,

transmission of an LCP Echo-Request must not cause the Out-

Identifier-Ctr counter to be incremented.

Length

The Length field is two octets and indicates the length of the LQM

packet including the Code, Identifier, Length and all defined

fields. Octets outside the range of the length field should be

treated as Data Link Layer padding and should be ignored on

reception. In order for the correct In-Tx-Octets and In-Rx-Octets

values to be calculated, Link-Quality-Reports MUST be consistently

transmitted with the same amount of padding.

Magic-Number

The Magic-Number field is four octets and aids in detecting

looped-back links. Unless modified by a Configuration Option, the

Magic-Number MUST always be transmitted as zero and MUST always be

ignored on reception. If Magic-Numbers have been negotiated,

incoming LQM packets should be checked to make sure that the local

end is not seeing its own Magic-Number and thus a looped-back

link.

In-Tx-LQRs

The In-Tx-LQRs field is one octet and indicates the number of

periods covered by the Measurements section of this Link-Quality-

Report. The In-Tx-LQRs field is copied from the In-Tx-LQRs state

variable on transmission.

Last-In-Id

The Prev-In-Id field is one octet and indicates the age of the

Measurements section of this Link-Quality-Report. The Last-In-Id

field is copied from the Last-In-Id field on transmission. On

reception, the Last-In-Id field may be compared with the Out-

Identifier-Ctr to determine how many, if any, outbound Link-

Quality-Reports have been lost.

V

The V field is 1 bit and indicates whether or not the Measurements

section of this Link-Quality-Report is valid. The V field is

copied from the Measurements-Valid state variable on transmission.

If the V field is not set to 1, then the In-Tx-LQRs, Last-In-Id,

In-Tx-Packets, In-Tx-Octets, In-Rx-Packets and In-Rx-Octets fields

should be ignored.

Reserved

The Reserved field is 15 bits and is intended to pad the remaining

packet fields to even four-octet boundaries for the convenience of

hardware implementations. The Reserved field should always be

transmitted as zero and ignored on reception.

In-Tx-Packets

The In-Tx-Packets field is four octets and indicates the number of

packets transmitted on the inbound link of the Link-Quality-Report

transmitter during the last measured period. The In-Tx-Packets

field is copied from the In-Tx-Packets state variable on

transmission.

In-Tx-Octets

The In-Tx-Octets field is four octets and indicates the number of

octets transmitted on the inbound link of the Link-Quality-Report

transmitter during the last measured period. The In-Tx-Octets

field is copied from the In-Tx-Octets state variable on

transmission.

In-Rx-Packets

The In-Rx-Packets field is four octets and indicates the number of

packets received on the inbound link of the Link-Quality-Report

transmitter during the last measured period. The In-Rx-Packets

field is copied from the In-Rx-Packets state variable on

transmission.

In-Rx-Octets

The In-Rx-Octets field is four octets and indicates the number of

octets received on the inbound link of the Link-Quality-Report

transmitter during the last measured period. The In-Rx-Octets

field is copied from the In-Rx-Octets state variable on

transmission.

Out-Tx-Packets

The Out-Tx-Packets field is four octets and is used to calculate

the number of packets transmitted on the outbound link of the

Link-Quality-Report transmitter during a period. The Out-Tx-

Packets field is copied from the Out-Tx-Packets-Ctr counter on

transmission.

Out-Tx-Octets

The Out-Tx-Octets field is four octets and is used to calculate

the number of octets transmitted on the outbound link of the

Link-Quality-Report transmitter during a period. The Out-Tx-

Octets field is copied from the Out-Tx-Octets-Ctr counter on

transmission.

In-Rx-Packets

The In-Rx-Packets field is four octets and is used to calculate

the number of packets received on the inbound link of the Link-

Quality-Report receiver during a period. The In-Rx-Packets field

is copied from the In-Rx-Packets-Ctr counter on reception. The

In-Rx-Packets is not shown because it is not actually transmitted

over the link. Rather, it is logically appended (in an

implementation dependent manner) to the packet by the

implementation's Rx process.

In-Rx-Octets

The In-Rx-Octets field is four octets and is used to calculate the

number of octets received on the inbound link of the Link-

Quality-Report receiver during a period. The In-Rx-Octets field

is copied from the In-Rx-Octets-Ctr counter on reception. The

In-Rx-Octets is not shown because it is not actually transmitted

over the link. Rather, it is logically appended (in an

implementation dependent manner) to the packet by the

implementation's Rx process.

3.7. Policy Suggestions

Link-Quality-Report packets provide a mechanism to determine the link

quality, but it is up to each implementation to decide when the link

is usable. It is recommended that this policy implement some amount

of hysteresis so that the link does not bounce up and down. A

particularly good policy is to use a K out of N algorithm. In such

an algorithm, there must be K successes out of the last N periods for

the link to be considered of good quality.

Procedures for recovery from poor quality links are unspecified and

may vary from implementation to implementation. A suggested approach

is to immediately close all other Network-Layer protocols (i.e.,

cause IPCP to transmit a Terminate-Req), but to continue transmitting

Link-Quality-Reports. Once the link quality again reaches an

acceptable level, Network-Layer protocols can be reconfigured.

3.8. Example

An example may be helpful. Assume that Link-Manager implementation A

transmits a Link-Quality-Report which is received by Link-Manager

implementation B at time t0 with the following values:

Out-Tx-Packets 5

Out-Tx-Octets 100

In-Rx-Packets 3

In-Rx-Octets 70

Assume that A then transmits 20 IP packets with 200 octets, of which

15 packets and 150 octets are received by B. At time t1, A transmits

another LQR which is received by B as follows:

Out-Tx-Packets 26 (5 old, plus 20 IP, plus 1 LQR)

Out-Tx-Octets 342 (42 for LQR)

In-Rx-Packets 19

In-Rx-Octets 262

Implementation B can now calculate the number of packets and octets

transmitted, received and lost on its inbound link as follows:

In-Tx-Packets = 26 - 5 = 21

In-Tx-Octets = 342 - 100 = 242

In-Rx-Packets = 10 - 3 = 16

In-Rx-Octets = 262 - 70 = 192

In-Lost-Packets = 21 - 16 = 5

In-Lost-Octets = 242 - 192 = 50

After doing these calculations, B evaluates the measurements in what

ever way its implemented policy specifies. Also, the next time that

B transmits an LQR to A, it will report these values in the

Measurements section, thereby allowing A to evaluate these same

measurements.

4. Password Authentication Protocol

The Password Authentication Protocol (PAP) may be used to

authenticate a peer by verifying the identity of the remote end of

the link. Use of the PAP must first be negotiated using the LCP

Authentication-Type Configuration Option. Successful negotiation

adds an additional Authentication phase to the Link Control Protocol,

after the Link Quality Determination phase, and before the Network

Layer Protocol Configuration Negotiation phase. PAP packets received

before the Authentication phase is reached should be silently

discarded. The Authentication phase is exited once an Authenticate-

Ack packet is sent or received.

PAP is intended for use primarily by hosts and routers that connect

via switched circuits or dial-up lines to a PPP network server. The

server can then use the identification of the connecting host or

router in the selection of options for network layer negotiations or

failing authentication, drop the connection.

Note that PAP is not a strong authentication method. Passwords are

passed over the circuit in the clear and there is no protection from

repeated trial and error attacks. Work is currently underway on more

secure authentication methods for PPP and other protocols. It is

strongly recommended to switch to these methods when they become

available.

4.1. Packet Format

Exactly one Password Authentication Protocol packet is encapsulated

in the Information field of PPP Data Link Layer frames where the

protocol field indicates type hex c023 (Password Authentication

Protocol). A summary of the Password Authentication Protocol packet

format is shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to

right.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Code Identifier Length

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Data ...

+-+-+-+-+

Code

The Code field is one octet and identifies the type of PAP packet.

PAP Codes are assigned as follows:

1 Authenticate

2 Authenticate-Ack

3 Authenticate-Nak

Identifier

The Identifier field is one octet and aids in matching requests

and replies.

Length

The Length field is two octets and indicates the length of the PAP

packet including the Code, Identifier, Length and Data fields.

Octets outside the range of the Length field should be treated as

Data Link Layer padding and should be ignored on reception.

Data

The Data field is zero or more octets. The format of the Data

field is determined by the Code field.

4.2. Authenticate

Description

The Authenticate packet is used to begin the Password

Authentication Protocol. An implementation having sent a LCP

Configure-Ack packet with an Authentication-Type Configuration

Option further specifying the Password Authentication Protocol

must send an Authenticate packet during the Authentication phase.

An implementation receiving a Configure-Ack with said

Configuration Option should expect the remote end to send an

Authenticate packet during this phase.

An Authenticate packet is sent with the Code field set to 1

(Authenticate) and the Peer-ID and Password fields filled as

desired.

Upon reception of an Authenticate, some type of Authenticate reply

MUST be transmitted.

A summary of the Authenticate packet format is shown below. The

fields are transmitted from left to right.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Code Identifier Length

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Peer-ID Length Peer-Id ...

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Passwd-Length Password ...

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Code

1 for Authenticate.

Identifier

The Identifier field is one octet and aids in matching requests

and replies. The Identifier field should be changed each time a

Authenticate is transmitted which is different from the preceding

request.

Peer-ID-Length

The Peer-ID-Length field is one octet and indicates the length of

the Peer-ID field

Peer-ID

The Peer-ID field is zero or more octets and indicates the name of

the peer to be authenticated.

Passwd-Length

The Passwd-Length field is one octet and indicates the length of

the Password field

Password

The Password field is zero or more octets and indicates the

password to be used for authentication.

4.3. Authenticate-Ack

Description

If the Peer-ID/Password pair received in an Authenticate is both

recognizable and acceptable, then a PAP implementation should

transmit a PAP packet with the Code field set to 2 (Authenticate-

Ack), the Identifier field copied from the received Authenticate,

and the Message field optionally filled with an ASCII message.

A summary of the Authenticate-Ack packet format is shown below. The

fields are transmitted from left to right.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Code Identifier Length

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Msg-Length Message ...

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

Code

2 for Authenticate-Ack.

Identifier

The Identifier field is one octet and aids in matching requests

and replies. The Identifier field MUST be copied from the

Identifier field of the Authenticate which caused this

Authenticate-Ack.

Msg-Length

The Msg-Length field is one octet and indicates the length of the

Message field

Message

The Message field is zero or more octets and indicates an ASCII

message.

4.4. Authenticate-Nak

Description

If the Peer-ID/Password pair received in a Authenticate is not

recognizable or acceptable, then a PAP implementation should

transmit a PAP packet with the Code field set to 3 (Authenticate-

Nak), the Identifier field copied from the received Authenticate,

and the Message field optionally filled with an ASCII message.

A summary of the Authenticate-Nak packet format is shown below. The

fields are transmitted from left to right.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Code Identifier Length

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Msg-Length Message ...

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

Code

3 for Authenticate-Nak.

Identifier

The Identifier field is one octet and aids in matching requests

and replies. The Identifier field MUST be copied from the

Identifier field of the Authenticate which caused this

Authenticate-Nak.

Msg-Length

The Msg-Length field is one octet and indicates the length of the

Message field

Message

The Message field is zero or more octets and indicates an ASCII

message.

5. IP Control Protocol (IPCP) Configuration Options

IPCP Configuration Options allow negotiatiation of desirable Internet

Protocol parameters. Negotiable modifications proposed in this document

include IP addresses and compression protocols.

The initial proposed values for the IPCP Configuration Option Type field

(see [1]) are assigned as follows:

1 IP-Addresses

2 Compression-Type

5.1. IP-Addresses

Description

This Configuration Option provides a way to negotiate the IP

addresses to be used on each end of the link. By default, no IP

addresses are assigned to either end. An address specified as

zero shall be interpreted as requesting the remote end to specify

the address. If an implementation allows the assignment of

multiple IP addresses, then it may include multiple IP Address

Configuration Options in its Configure-Request packets. An

implementation receiving a Configure-Request specifying multiple

IP Address Configuration Options may send a Configure-Reject

specifying one or more of the specified IP Addresses. An

implementation which desires that no IP addresses be assigned

(such as a "half-gateway") may reject all IP Address Configuration

Options.

A summary of the IP-Addresses Configuration Option format is shown

below. The fields are transmitted from left to right.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type Length Source-IP-Address

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Source-IP-Address (cont) Destination-IP-Address

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Destination-IP-Address (cont)

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type

1

Length

10

Source-IP-Address

The four octet Source-IP-Address is the desired local address of

the sender of a Configure-Request. In a Configure-Ack,

Configure-Nak or Configure-Reject, the Source-IP-Address is the

remote address of the sender, and is thus a local address with

respect to the Configuration Option receiver.

Destination-IP-Address

The four octet Destination-IP-Address is the remote address with

respect to the sender of a Configure-Request. In a Configure-Ack,

Configure-Nak or Configure-Reject, the Destination-IP-Address is

the local address of the sender, and is thus a remote address with

respect to the Configuration Option receiver.

Default

No IP addresses assigned.

5.2. Compression-Type

Description

This Configuration Option provides a way to negotiate the use of a

specific compression protocol. By default, compression is not

enabled.

A summary of the Compression-Type Configuration Option format is

shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to right.

0 1 2 3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Type Length Compression-Type

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Data ...

+-+-+-+-+

Type

2

Length

>= 4

Compression-Type

The Compression-Type field is two octets and indicates the type of

compression protocol desired. Values for the Compression-Type are

always the same as the PPP Data Link Layer Protocol field values

for that same compression protocol. The most up-to-date values of

the Compression-Type field are specified in "Assigned Numbers"

[2]. Initial values are assigned as follows:

Value (in hex) Protocol

0037 Van Jacobson Compressed TCP/IP

Data

The Data field is zero or more octets and contains additional data

as determined by the compression protocol indicated in the

Compression-Type field.

Default

No compression protocol enabled.

References

[1] Perkins, D., "The Point-to-Point Protocol for the Transmission

of Multi-Protocol of Datagrams Over Point-to-Point Links", RFC

1171, July, 1990.

[2] Reynolds, J., and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", RFC1060,

USC/Information Sciences Institute, March 1990.

Security Considerations

Security issues are discussed in Section 2.3.

Author's Address

This proposal is the product of the Point-to-Point Protocol Working

Group of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). The working

group can be contacted via the chair:

Russ Hobby

UC Davis

Computing Services

Davis, CA 95616

Phone: (916) 752-0236

EMail: rdhobby@ucdavis.edu

Questions about this memo can also be directed to:

Drew D. Perkins

Carnegie Mellon University

Networking and Communications

Pittsburgh, PA 15213

Phone: (412) 268-8576

EMail: ddp@andrew.cmu.edu

Acknowledgments

Many people spent significant time helping to develop the Point-to-

Point Protocol. The complete list of people is too numerous to list,

but the following people deserve special thanks: Ken Adelman (TGV),

Craig Fox (NSC), Phill Gross (NRI), Russ Hobby (UC Davis), David

Kaufman (Proteon), John LoVerso (Xylogics), Bill Melohn (Sun

Microsystems), Mike Patton (MIT), Drew Perkins (CMU), Greg Satz

(cisco systems) and Asher Waldfogel (Wellfleet).

 
 
 
免责声明:本文为网络用户发布,其观点仅代表作者个人观点,与本站无关,本站仅提供信息存储服务。文中陈述内容未经本站证实,其真实性、完整性、及时性本站不作任何保证或承诺,请读者仅作参考,并请自行核实相关内容。
2023年上半年GDP全球前十五强
 百态   2023-10-24
美众议院议长启动对拜登的弹劾调查
 百态   2023-09-13
上海、济南、武汉等多地出现不明坠落物
 探索   2023-09-06
印度或要将国名改为“巴拉特”
 百态   2023-09-06
男子为女友送行,买票不登机被捕
 百态   2023-08-20
手机地震预警功能怎么开?
 干货   2023-08-06
女子4年卖2套房花700多万做美容:不但没变美脸,面部还出现变形
 百态   2023-08-04
住户一楼被水淹 还冲来8头猪
 百态   2023-07-31
女子体内爬出大量瓜子状活虫
 百态   2023-07-25
地球连续35年收到神秘规律性信号,网友:不要回答!
 探索   2023-07-21
全球镓价格本周大涨27%
 探索   2023-07-09
钱都流向了那些不缺钱的人,苦都留给了能吃苦的人
 探索   2023-07-02
倩女手游刀客魅者强控制(强混乱强眩晕强睡眠)和对应控制抗性的关系
 百态   2020-08-20
美国5月9日最新疫情:美国确诊人数突破131万
 百态   2020-05-09
荷兰政府宣布将集体辞职
 干货   2020-04-30
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案逍遥观:鹏程万里
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案神机营:射石饮羽
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案昆仑山:拔刀相助
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案天工阁:鬼斧神工
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案丝路古道:单枪匹马
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:与虎谋皮
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:李代桃僵
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案镇郊荒野:指鹿为马
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案金陵:小鸟依人
 干货   2019-11-12
倩女幽魂手游师徒任务情义春秋猜成语答案金陵:千金买邻
 干货   2019-11-12
 
推荐阅读
 
 
 
>>返回首頁<<
 
靜靜地坐在廢墟上,四周的荒凉一望無際,忽然覺得,淒涼也很美
© 2005- 王朝網路 版權所有