分享
 
 
 

RFC1626 - Default IP MTU for use over ATM AAL5

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

Network Working Group R. Atkinson

Request for Comments: 1626 Naval Research Laboratory

Category: Standards Track May 1994

Default IP MTU for use over ATM AAL5

Status of this Memo

This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the

Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for

improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet

Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state

and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Default Value for IP MTU over ATM AAL5

Protocols in wide use throughout the Internet, sUCh as the Network

File System (NFS), currently use large frame sizes (e.g. 8 KB).

Empirical evidence with various applications over the Transmission

Control Protocol (TCP) indicates that larger Maximum Transmission

Unit (MTU) sizes for the Internet Protocol (IP) tend to give better

performance. Fragmentation of IP datagrams is known to be highly

undesirable. [KM87] It is desirable to reduce fragmentation in the

network and thereby enhance performance by having the IP Maximum

Transmission Unit (MTU) for AAL5 be reasonably large. NFS defaults

to an 8192 byte frame size. Allowing for RPC/XDR, UDP, IP, and LLC

headers, NFS would prefer a default MTU of at least 8300 octets.

Routers can sometimes perform better with larger packet sizes because

most of the performance costs in routers relate to "packets handled"

rather than "bytes transferred". So there are a number of good

reasons to have a reasonably large default MTU value for IP over ATM

AAL5.

RFC1209 specifies the IP MTU over SMDS to be 9180 octets, which is

larger than 8300 octets but still in the same range. [RFC-1209] There

is no good reason for the default MTU of IP over ATM AAL5 to be

different from IP over SMDS, given that they will be the same

magnitude. Having the two be the same size will be helpful in

interoperability and will also help reduce incidence of IP

fragmentation.

Therefore, the default IP MTU for use with ATM AAL5 shall be 9180

octets. All implementations compliant and conformant with this

specification shall support at least the default IP MTU value for use

over ATM AAL5.

Permanent Virtual Circuits

Implementations which only support Permanent Virtual Circuits (PVCs)

will (by definition) not implement any ATM signalling protocol. Such

implementations shall use the default IP MTU value of 9180 octets

unless both parties have agreed in advance to use some other IP MTU

value via some mechanism not specified here.

Switched Virtual Circuits

Implementations that support Switched Virtual Circuits (SVCs) MUST

attempt to negotiate the AAL CPCS-SDU size using the ATM signalling

protocol. The industry standard ATM signalling protocol uses two

different parts of the Information Element named "AAL Parameters" to

exchange information on the MTU over the ATM circuit being setup

[ATMF93a]. The Forward Maximum CPCS-SDU Size field contains the

value over the path from the calling party to the called party. The

Backwards Maximum CPCS-SDU Size Identifier field contains the value

over the path from the called party to the calling party. The ATM

Forum specifies the valid values of this identifier as 1 to 65535

inclusive. Note that the ATM Forum's User-to-Network-Interface (UNI)

signalling permits the MTU in one direction to be different from the

MTU in the opposite direction, so the Forward Maximum CPCS-SDU Size

Identifier might have a different value from the Backwards Maximum

CPCS-SDU Size Identifier on the same connection.

If the calling party wishes to use the default MTU it shall still

include the "AAL Parameters" information element with the default

values for the Maximum CPCS-SDU Size as part of the SETUP message of

the ATM signalling protocol [ATMF93b]. If the calling party desires

to use a different value than the default, it shall include the "AAL

Parameters" information element with the desired value for the

Maximum CPCS-SDU Size as part of the SETUP message of the ATM

Signalling Protocol. The called party will respond using the same

information elements and identifiers in its CONNECT message response

[ATMF93c].

If the called party receives a SETUP message containing the "Maximum

CPCS-SDU Size" in the AAL Parameters information element, it shall

handle the Forward and Backward Maximum CPCS-SDU Size Identifier as

follows:

a) If it is able to accept the ATM MTU values proposed by the

SETUP message, it shall include an AAL Parameters information

element in its response. The Forward and Backwards Maximum

CPCS-SDU Size fields shall be present and their values shall be

equal to the corresponding values in the SETUP message.

b) If it wishes a smaller ATM MTU size than that proposed, then

it shall set the values of the Maximum CPCS-SDU Size in the AAL

Parameters information elements equal to the desired value in the

CONNECT message responding to the original SETUP message.

c) If the calling endpoint receives a CONNECT message that does

not contain the AAL Parameters Information Element, but the

corresponding SETUP message did contain the AAL Parameters

Information Telement (including the forward and backward CPCS-SDU

Size fields), it shall clear the call with cause "AAL Parameters

cannot be supported".

d) If either endpoint receives a STATUS message with cause

"Information Element Non-existent or Not Implemented" or cause

""Access Information Discarded", and with a diagnostic field

indicating the AAL Parameters Information Element identifier, it

shall clear the call with cause "AAL Parameters cannot be

supported."

e) If either endpoint receives CPCS-SDUs in excess of the

negotiated MTU size, it may use IP fragmentation or may clear the

call with cause "AAL Parameters cannot be supported". In this

case, an error has occurred either due to a fault in an end

system or in the ATM network. The error should be noted by ATM

network management for human examination and intervention.

If the called endpoint incorrectly includes the Forward and Backward

Maximum CPCS-SDU Size fields in the CONNECT messages (e.g. because

the original SETUP message did not include these fields) or it sets

these fields to an invalid value, then the calling party shall clear

the call with cause "Invalid Information Element Contents".

Path MTU Discovery Required

The Path MTU Discovery mechanism is an Internet Standard [RFC-1191]

and is an important mechanism for reducing IP fragmentation in the

Internet. This mechanism is particularly important because new

subnet ATM uses a default MTU sizes significantly different from

older subnet technologies such as Ethernet and FDDI.

In order to ensure good performance throughout the Internet and also

to permit IP to take full advantage of the potentially larger IP

datagram sizes supported by ATM, all routers implementations that

comply or conform with this specification must also implement the IP

Path MTU Discovery mechanism as defined in RFC-1191 and clarified by

RFC-1435. Host implementations should implement the IP Path MTU

Discovery mechanism as defined in RFC-1191.

Applicability Statement

The Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM AAL5 defined in RFC-1483 is

not specific to any model of IP and ATM interaction. [RFC-1483]

Similarly, this specification is general enough to apply to all

models for use of IP over ATM AAL5. Use of this specification is

recommended for all implementatons of IP over ATM AAL5 in order to

increase interoperability and performance. This specification does

not conflict with the Classical IP over ATM specification and may be

used as a conforming extension to that specification. [RFC-1577]

Applicability of this draft is not limited to the Classical IP over

ATM model.

Security Considerations

Security issues are not discussed in this memo.

References

[RFC-791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol - DARPA Internet Program

Protocol Specification", STD 5, RFC791, DARPA, September

1981.

[RFC-793] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol - DARPA

Internet Program Protocol Specification", STD 7, RFC793,

DARPA, September 1981.

[RFC-1122] Braden, R., Editor, Requirements for Internet Hosts --

Communications Layers, STD 3, RFC1122, USC/Information Sciences

Institute, October 1989, pp.58-60.

[RFC-1191] Mogul, J., and S. Deering, "Path MTU Discovery",

RFC1191, DECWRL, Stanford University, November 1990.

[RFC-1209] Piscitello, D., and J. Lawrence, "The Transmission of

IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service", RFC1209, Bell Communications

Research, March 1991.

[RFC-1435] Knowles, S., "IESG Advice from EXPerience with Path MTU

Discovery, RFC-1435, IESG, March 1993.

[RFC-1483] Heinanen, J., "Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM

Adapatation Layer 5", RFC1483, Telecom Finland, July 1993.

[RFC-1577] Laubach, M., "Classical IP and ARP over ATM", RFC1577,

Hewlett-Packard Laboratories, January 1994.

[ATMF93a] Breault, R., Grace, J., Jaeger, J., and L. Wojnaroski,

Editors, "ATM Forum User Network Interface Specification", Version

3.0, Section 5.4.5.5, p. 194-200, 10 September 1993, ATM Forum.

[ATMF93b] Breault, R., Grace, J., Jaeger, J., and L. Wojnaroski,

Editors, "ATM Forum User Network Interface Specification", Version

3.0, Section 5.3.1.7, p. 171-172, 10 September 1993, ATM Forum.

[ATMF93c] Breault, R., Grace, J., Jaeger, J., and L. Wojnaroski,

Editors, "ATM Forum User Network Interface Specification", Version

3.0, Section 5.3.1.3, p. 168, 10 September 1993, ATM Forum.

[KM87] Kent C., and J. Mogul, "Fragmentation Considered Harmful",

Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM '87 Workshop on Frontiers in

Computer Communications Technology, August 1987.

Acknowledgements

While all members of the IETF's IP over ATM Working Group have been

helpful, Vern Schryver, Rob Warnock, Craig Partridge, Subbu

Subramaniam, and Bryan Lyles have been especially helpful to the

author in analysing the host and routing implications of the default

IP MTU value. Similarly, Dan Grossman provided significant review

and help in ensuring alignment of this text with the related work in

the ATM Forum and ITU.

Disclaimer

Author's organisation provided for identification purposes only.

This document presents the author's views and is not necessarily the

official opinion of his employer.

Author's Address

Randall J. Atkinson

Information Technology Division

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington, DC 20375-5320

USA

 
 
 
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