💾 Archived View for gemini.bortzmeyer.org › rfc-mirror › rfc2126.txt captured on 2021-12-05 at 23:47:19.
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Network Working Group Y. Pouffary
Request for Comments: 2126 Digital Equipment Corporation
Category: Standards Track A. Young
ISODE Consortium
March 1997
ISO Transport Service on top of TCP (ITOT)
Status of the 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.
Abstract
This document is a revision to STD35, RFC1006 written by Marshall T.
Rose and Dwight E. Cass. Since the release of RFC1006 in May 1987,
much experience has been gained in using ISO transport services on
top of TCP. This document refines the protocol and will eventually
supersede RFC1006.
This document describes the mechanism to allow ISO Transport Services
to run over TCP over IPv4 or IPv6. It also defines a number of new
features, which are not provided in RFC1006.
The goal of this version is to minimise the number of changes to
RFC1006 and ISO 8073 transport protocol definitions, while maximising
performance, extending its applicability and protecting the installed
base of RFC1006 users.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction, Motivation.....................................2
2. The Model....................................................3
2.1 ISO Transport Model.........................................3
2.2 ISO Transport over TCP (ITOT) Model.........................4
2.3 Overview of Protocol and Service............................5
3 Service Definition............................................5
3.1 Transport Service Definition................................5
3.1.1 Transport Service Definition Primitives...................6
3.2 Network Service Definition..................................7
3.2.1 ISO 8348 CONS primitives..................................7
3.2.2 TCP Service primitives....................................8
3.2.3 Mapping TCP as a Network Service Provider.................8
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
3.2.3.1 Network Connection Establishment........................8
3.2.3.2 Network Data Transfer...................................9
3.2.3.3 Network Connection Release.............................10
4. Transport Protocol Specification............................10
4.1 Class 0 over TCP...........................................10
4.1.1 Connection Establishment.................................11
4.1.2 Data Transfer............................................11
4.1.3 Connection Release.......................................11
4.2 Class 2 over TCP...........................................12
4.2.1 Connection Establishment.................................12
4.2.2 Data Transfer............................................13
4.2.3 Connection Release.......................................15
4.3 TPKT Packet Format.........................................15
5. Address representations.....................................16
5.1 String representation of ITOT access point addresses.......17
5.2 OSI Network Address encoding...............................17
6. Notes to Implementors.......................................17
6.1 TCP Connection Establishment...............................17
6.2 TCP Data transfer..........................................17
6.3 Class negotiation..........................................18
6.4 Default maximum TPDU size..................................18
6.5 Class 0 TPDU bit encoding..................................18
6.6 Class 2 Options............................................19
6.7 Class 2 Expedited Data Acknowledgement.....................21
6.8 Class 2 Normal Data and Expedited Data handling............21
6.9 Class 2 Forward Connection procedure.......................22
6.10 TPKT......................................................22
7. Rationale - Interoperability with RFC1006...................22
8. Security Considerations.....................................23
Acknowledgements...............................................23
References.....................................................23
Authors' Addresses.............................................25
1. Introduction, Motivation
There are two basic approaches which can be taken when "porting" ISO
applications to TCP/IP ([RFC793],[RFC791]) and IPv6 [IPV6]
environments. One approach is to port each individual application
separately, developing local protocols on top of TCP. A second
approach is based on the notion of layering the ISO Transport Service
over TCP/IP. This approach solves the problem for all applications
which use the ISO Transport Service. This document describes the
second approach.
The protocol described in this memo is based on the observation that
both the Internet Protocol Suite and the ISO Protocol Suite are
layered systems. A key aspect of the layering principle is that of
layer-independence. The concept of layer-independence means that if
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
one preserves the services offered by a particular layer (the
Service-Provider) then the Service-User at that layer is completely
unaffected by changes in the underlying layers or by the protocol
used within the layer.
This document defines a Transport Service which appears to be
identical to the Services and Interfaces offered by the ISO Transport
Service Definition [ISO8072], but which will in fact implement the
ISO Transport Protocol [ISO8073] on top of TCP/IP (IPv4 or IPv6),
rather than the ISO Network Service [ISO8348].
The basis of this document is STD35, RFC1006 [RFC1006] written by
Marshall T. Rose and Dwight E. Cass and it defines two transport
classes of service. Transport Class 0 refines and supersedes the
RFC1006 protocol and is aimed at preserving the RFC1006 installed
base. Transport Class 2 defines a number of new features which are
not provided in RFC1006, such as independence of Normal and Expedited
Data channels and Explicit Transport Disconnection. These new
features are largely based on RFC1859 [RFC1859] and extend the
applicability of RFC1006 to new groups of applications.
This document specifies changes to the standards mentioned above and
must be read in the context of the above mentioned standards. It will
not be meaningful on its own.
The 'well known' TCP port 102 is reserved for hosts which implement
the Protocol described in this document. Note that the Protocol does
not mandate the use of TCP port 102 for all connections.
2. The Model
This section describes the differences between the model used by the
ISO Transport and that described in this document.
2.1 ISO Transport Model
The ISO 8072 standard describes the ISO Transport Service Definition
(TS). The ISO Transport Service Definition describes the services
offered by the Transport Service Provider and the interfaces used to
access these services.
The ISO 8073 standard describes the ISO Transport Protocol
Specification (TP). The ISO Transport Protocol specifies common
encoding rules and a number of classes of transport protocol
procedure which can be used with different network Quality of
Service.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
The ISO 8348 standard describes the ISO Network Service Definition
(NS). The ISO Network Service Definition describes the services
offered by the network service Provider and the interfaces used to
access these services.
The ISO Network Service specifies two type of service:
- Connection Oriented Network Service (CONS)
- ConnectionLess Network Service (CLNS)
The ISO Transport Protocol specifies five classes of procedures when
operating over CONS and one class of procedure when operating over
CLNS.
The relationship of these ISO standards is illustrated below:
Transport Service User
|
|-ISO Transport Service Definition [ISO8072]
|
+--------------------------------------------------+
| Transport Service Provider |
| ISO Transport Protocol Specification [ISO8073] |
+--------------------------------------------------+
|
|-ISO Network Service Definition [ISO8348]
|
2.2 ISO Transport over TCP (ITOT) Model
This document defines a model which provides ISO Transport Service,
with minor extensions, running over TCP.
The ISO 8072 Transport Service is supported with minor modifications.
See section 3.1.
The ISO 8073 Transport Protocol with some modifications is used to
provide the modified Transport Service.
The Transmission Control Protocol is used in place of the ISO 8348 to
provide a CONS like service. See section 4.
This document specifies a simple encapsulation mechanism between the
modified ISO 8073 Transport Protocol and the TCP.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
ISO 8073 Transport Protocol specifies five classes when operating
over ISO 8348 CONS. This document specifies how to operate class 0
and 2 over TCP. This document does not prevent use of other classes
from operating over TCP, but their specification is beyond the scope
of this document.
The relationship of these standards is illustrated below:
Transport Service User
|
|-ISO Transport Service (modified)
|
+--------------------------------------------------+
| Transport Service Provider |
| ISO Transport Protocol (modified) Specification |
+--------------------------------------------------+
|
|-TCP as a Connection Oriented Network Service
|
2.3 Overview of Protocol and Service
This document defines use of the ISO Transport Protocol (with some
extensions) running over TCP. Two variants of the protocol are
defined, "Class 0 over TCP" and "Class 2 over TCP", which are based
closely on the ISO Transport Class 0 and 2 Protocol.
Section 3 defines the Service offered to the Transport User by this
protocol, and shows the differences from the ISO Transport Service.
The mapping between the Service primitives in the ISO Network Service
and TCP are defined. Section 4 defines the Transport Protocol.
3 Service Definition
This section describes the Transport Service offered to the Transport
User. It also defines the mapping between the Network Service
Definition and the TCP Service Definition.
3.1 Transport Service Definition
ISO 8072 Transport Service is supported with the following
extensions:
- Use of Quality of Service parameter is not defined
- Access to Non-disruptive Transport Disconnection
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
3.1.1 Transport Service Definition Primitives
Information is transferred to and from the TS-User in the Transport
Service primitives listed below:
Actions
T-CONNECT.REQUEST
- a TS-User indicates that it wants to establish transport
connection
T-CONNECT.RESPONSE
- a TS-User indicates that it will honour the request
T-DISCONNECT.REQUEST
- a TS-User indicates that the transport connection is to
be closed
T-DATA.REQUEST
- a TS-User sends data
T-EXPEDITED DATA.REQUEST
- a TS-User sends "expedited" data
Events
T-CONNECT.INDICATION
- a TS-User is notified that a transport connection
establishment is in progress
T-CONNECT.CONFIRMATION
- a TS-User is notified that the transport connection has been
established
T-DISCONNECT.INDICATION
- a TS-User is notified that the transport connection is closed
T-DATA.INDICATION
- a TS-User is notified that data can be read from the transport
connection
T-EXPEDITED_DATA.INDICATION
- a TS-User is notified that expedited data can be read from
the transport connection
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
3.2 Network Service Definition
This section describes how TCP is used to provide ISO 8348 CONS.
3.2.1 ISO 8348 CONS primitives
Information is transferred to and from the NS-provider in the Network
Service Primitives listed below:
Actions
N-CONNECT.REQUEST
- a NS-user indicates that it wants to establish a network
connection
N-CONNECT.RESPONSE
- a NS-user indicates that it will honour the request
N-DISCONNECT.REQUEST
- a NS-user indicates that the network connection is to be
closed
N-DATA.REQUEST
- a NS-user sends data
N-EXPEDITED_DATA.REQUEST
- a NS-user sends "expedited" data
Events
N-CONNECT.INDICATION
- a NS-user is notified that a network connection establishment
is in progress
N-CONNECT.CONFIRMATION
- a NS-user is notified that the network connection has been
established
N-DISCONNECT.INDICATION
- a NS-user is notified that the network connection is closed
N-DATA.INDICATION
- a NS-user is notified that data can be read from the network
connection
N-EXPEDITED_DATA.INDICATION
- a NS-user is notified that expedited data can be read from
the connection
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 7]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
3.2.2 TCP Service primitives
The mapping between, ISO 8348 CONS primitives and TCP Service
primitives, defined in this document assumes that the TCP offers the
following service primitives:
Actions
TCP-LISTEN_PORT
- PASSIVE open on given port
TCP-OPEN_PORT
- ACTIVE open to the given port
TCP-READ_DATA
- data is read from the connection
TCP-SEND_DATA
- data is sent on the connection
TCP-CLOSE
- the connection is closed (pending data is sent)
Events
TCP-CONNECTED
- open succeeded (either ACTIVE or PASSIVE)
TCP-CONNECT_FAIL
- ACTIVE open failed
TCP-DATA_READY
- Data can be read from the connection
TCP-ERRORED
- the connection has errored and is now closed
TCP-CLOSED
- an orderly disconnection has started
3.2.3 Mapping TCP as a Network Service Provider
3.2.3.1 Network Connection Establishment
In order to perform a N-CONNECT.REQUEST action, the TS-Provider
performs a TCP-OPEN_PORT to the desired IPv4 or IPv6 address using
the selected TCP port. When the TCP signals either success or
failure, this results in an N-CONNECT.INDICATION action.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 8]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
In order to await a N-CONNECT.INDICATION event, a server performs a
TCP-LISTEN_PORT to the selected TCP port. When a client successfully
connects to this port, the TCP-CONNECTED event occurs and an implicit
N-CONNECT.RESPONSE action is performed.
Mapping parameters between the TCP service and the ISO 8348 CONS
service is done as follow:
Network Service TCP
--------------- ---
CONNECTION ESTABLISHMENT
Called address server's IPv4 or IPv6 address
and TCP port number.
Calling address client's IPv4 or IPv6 address
all others parameters ignored
Please also refer to 'Notes to Implementors' section 6.1.
TCP port 102 is reserved for implementations conforming to this
specification. Use of any TCP port is conformant to this
specification.
3.2.3.2 Network Data Transfer
In order perform a N-DATA.REQUEST action, the TS-provider constructs
the desired transport protocol data unit (TPDU), encapsulates the
TPDU in a discrete unit called TPKT and uses the TCP-SEND_DATA
primitive. Please also refer to 'Notes to Implementors' section 6.2.
In order to trigger a N-DATA.INDICATION action, the TCP indicates
that data is ready through TCP-DATA_READY event and a TPKT is read
using the TCP-READ_DATA primitive.
Mapping parameters between the TCP service and the ISO 8348 CONS
service is done as follow:
Network Service TCP
--------------- ---
DATA TRANSFER
NS User Data (NSDU) DATA
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 9]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
3.2.3.3 Network Connection Release
In order to perform an N-DISCONNECT.REQUEST action, the TS-provider
simply closes the TCP connection through TCP-CLOSE primitive.
In order to trigger a N-DISCONNECT.INDICATION, the TCP indicates that
the connection has been closed through TCP-CLOSE event. If the TCP
connection has failed the TCP indicates that the connection has been
closed through TCP-ERRORED event, this trigger a N-
DISCONNECT.INDICATION.
Mapping parameters between the TCP service and the ISO 8348 CONS
service is done as follow:
Network Service TCP
--------------- ---
CONNECTION RELEASE
all parameters ignored
4. Transport Protocol Specification
ISO 8073 Transport Protocol Classes 0 and 2 are supported with
extensions as defined in each subsections below.
A Transport Protocol class is selected for a particular transport
connection based on the requirements of the TS-User.
ISO 8073 Transport Protocol exchanges information between peers in
discrete units of information called transport protocol data units
(TPDU). The protocol defined in this document encapsulates these
TPDUs in discrete units termed Packets (TPKT).
This document mandates the implementation of ISO 8073 Transport
Protocol options negotiation (which includes class negotiation).
Please refer to 'Notes to Implementors' section 6.3 with respect to
Class negotiation and to the 'Rationale' section 7. with respect to
Interoperability with RFC1006.
4.1 Class 0 over TCP
Class 0 provides the functions needed for connection establishment
with negotiation, data transfer with segmentation, and protocol error
reporting. It provides Transport Connection with flow control based
on that of the NS-provider (TCP). It provides Transport
Disconnection based on the NS-provider Disconnection.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 10]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
Class 0 is suitable for data transfer with no Explicit Transport
Disconnection.
4.1.1 Connection Establishment
The principles used in connection establishment are based upon those
described in ISO 8073, with the following extensions:
- Connect Data may be exchanged using the user data fields
of Connect Request (CR) and Connect Confirm (CC) TPDUs
- Use of "Expedited Data Transfer Service" may be negotiated
using the negotiation mechanism specified in ISO 8073. The
default is to not use "Expedited Data Transfer Service".
- Non-standard TPDU size may be negotiated using the negotiation
mechanism specified in ISO 8073. The maximum TPDU size is 65531
octets. The Default maximum TPDU size is 65531 octets.
Please refer to 'Notes to Implementors' section 6.4.
4.1.2 Data Transfer
The elements of procedure used during transfer are based upon those
presented in ISO 8073, with the following extension:
- Expedited Data may be supported (if negotiated during connection
establishment) by sending the defined Expedited Data (ED) TPDU.
The ED TPDU is sent inband on the same TCP connection as all of the
other TPDUs.
To support Expedited Data a non-standard TPDU is defined. The format
used for the ED TPDU is nearly identical to the format for the Normal
Data (DT) TPDU. The only difference between ED TPDU and DT TPDU is
that the value used for the TPDU code is ED and not DT. The size of a
Expedited Data user data field is 1 to 16 octets.
For TPDU bit encoding please refer to 'Notes to Implementors' section
6.5.
4.1.3 Connection Release
The elements of procedure used during a connection release are
identical to those presented in ISO 8073.
Transport Disconnection is based on the NS-provider (TCP)
Disconnection and is therefore disruptive.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 11]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
4.2 Class 2 over TCP
Class 2 provides the functions needed for connection establishment
with negotiation, data transfer with segmentation, and protocol error
reporting. It provides Transport Connection with flow control based
on that of the NS-provider (TCP). It provides Explicit Transport
Disconnection.
Class 2 is suitable when independence of Normal and Expedited Data
channels are required or when Explicit Transport Disconnection is
needed.
4.2.1 Connection Establishment
The principles used in connection establishment are based upon those
described in ISO 8073, with the following extensions:
- Connection Request and Connection Confirmation TPDUs may
negotiate use of "Transport Expedited Data Transfer" service.
"Transport Expedited Data Transfer" service is selected
by setting bit 1 of the "Additional Option" parameter,
and is negotiated using the mechanism specified in ISO 8073.
The default is to not use "Transport Expedited Data Transfer
Service".
- Connection Request and Connection Confirmation TPDUs may
negotiate use of "Expedited Data Acknowledgement".
"Expedited Data Acknowledgement" is selected by setting
bit 6 of the "Additional Option" parameter, and is
negotiated using the mechanism specified in ISO 8073.
The default is to not use "Expedited Data Acknowledgement"
for Expedited Data transfer.
- Connection Request and Connection Confirmation TPDUs may
negotiate use of the "Non-blocking Expedited Data" service.
"Non-blocking Expedited Data" is selected by setting
bit 7 of the "Additional Option" parameter, and is
negotiated using the mechanism specified in ISO 8073.
The default is to not use the "Non-blocking Expedited
Data" service.
- Connection Request and Connection Confirmation TPDUs may
negotiate use of either "Forward Connection (Splitting
and Recombining)" or "Reverse Connection" procedure for
Expedited Data transfer.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 12]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
Use of "Forward Connection" or use of "Reverse Connection"
procedure is selected by setting bit 4 of the "Additional
Option" parameter, and is negotiated using the mechanism
specified in ISO 8073.
The default is to use "Forward Connection" procedure for
Expedited Data transfer.
- Connection Request and Connection Confirmation TPDUs must not
negotiate the use of "Explicit Flow Control".
- Non-standard TPDU size may be negotiated using the negotiation
mechanism specified in ISO 8073. The maximum TPDU size is 65531
octets. The default maximum TPDU size is 65531 octets.
Please refer to 'Notes to Implementors' section 6.4.
In the absence of a Flow Control policy, the use of ISO 8073
Multiplexing procedure lead to degradation of the quality of service.
The Protocol defined in this document does not supported
Multiplexing.
For the values of the "Additional Option" parameter please refer to
'Notes to Implementors' section 6.6.
For Class 2 options Profile please also refer to 'Notes to
Implementors' section 6.6.
4.2.2 Data Transfer
The elements of procedure used during transfer are based upon those
presented in ISO 8073, with the following extensions:
- Expedited Data may be supported (if negotiated during connection
establishment) by sending Expedited Data (ED) TPDU.
- "Expedited Data Acknowledgement" may be supported (if negotiated
during connection establishment) by sending Expedited Data
Acknowledgement (EA) TPDU.
When using "Expedited Data Acknowledgement", ED TPDUs require
acknowledgement, and once an ED TPDU is transmitted no further
DT/ED TPDUs may be sent until the outstanding ED TPDU has been
acknowledged.
When non-use of "Expedited Data Acknowledgement" has been
negotiated, ED TPDUs require no acknowledgement, and further DT/ED
TPDUs may be sent immediatly.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 13]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
Please refer to 'Notes to Implementors' section 6.7 and section
6.8.
- "Non-blocking Expedited Data" service may be supported (if
negotiated during connection establishment).
When using "Non-blocking Expedited Data" service, the sender of an
ED TPDU shall send the ED TPDU on both the Normal Data and
Expedited Data TCP connections. Transmission of subsequent DT TPDU
will not be interrupted. The receiver of ED TPDU counts how many
ED TPDU it has seen on each TCP connection, and will only deliver
to the TS-User the ED TPDU from the TCP connection with the higher
count.
When non-use of "Non-blocking Expedited Data" has been negotiated,
ED TPDUs will not be duplicated.
Please refer to 'Notes to Implementors' section 6.7 and section
6.8.
- For Expedited Data transfer, there are two possible
procedures for the establishment and assignment of the Expedited
Data TCP connection. Which one is used is negotiated during
connection establishment.
Both the "Forward Connection" procedure and "Reverse Connection"
procedure guarantee independence of the Normal Data TCP connection
from the Expedited Data TCP connection. They also ensure that a
busy Normal Data TCP connection cannot block an Expedited Data TCP
connection.
The Expedited Data TCP connection created by either procedure must
be between the same pair of hosts as the Normal Data TCP
connection, must not be shared among Transport Connections, and
must remain established until the Transport Connection is
terminated, at which time it must be closed.
TCP connections created for Expedited Data transfer should also use
the TCP primitives defined in this document.
The Forward Connection (Splitting and Recombining) procedure is
defined in ISO 8073. This procedure allows a transport connection
to make use of multiple TCP connections. Please refer to 'Notes to
Implementors' section 6.9.
The Reverse Connection procedure is not defined in ISO 8073. When
using the Reverse Connection procedure the initiator of a Transport
Connection creates a Normal Data TCP connection using an
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 14]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
arbitrarily-chosen local TCP port 'x' and a known remote TCP port
(either the ITOT well-known port, or some other). The initiator
listens for an incoming TCP connection on the TCP port 'x'. The
responder of the Transport Connection must create a second TCP
connection (to be used for Expedited Data) using an arbitrarily-
chosen local TCP port 'y' and the remote TCP port 'x' , before it
can issue a CC TPDU on the Normal Data TCP connection. The
initiator need not listen for further TCP connections on port 'x'
after the Expedited Data TCP connection is established.
4.2.3 Connection Release
The elements of procedure used during a connection release are based
upon those described in ISO 8073. A connection can be terminated by
the TS-user in one of two ways:
- Disruptive Disconnect
- Non-Disruptive Disconnect
Disconnect Request (DR) and Disconnect Confirm (DC) TPDUs are
exchanged in both cases. The DR TPDU carries a Reason code indicating
the reason for the Disconnection.
Disruptive Disconnect specifies that all TPDUs still at the source
are not required to be sent to the destination before the connection
is disconnected. The DR Reason code is normal (80 hex).
Non-Disruptive Disconnect specifies that all TPDUs already given to
the local TS-provider must be delivered to the remote TS-user, before
the connection is disconnected. The DR Reason code is normal (80 hex)
with Additional Information parameter value set to 80 hex.
4.3 TPKT Packet Format
A fundamental difference between the TCP and the ISO Network Service
expected by ISO Transport is that the TCP manages a continuous stream
of octets, with no explicit boundaries.
ISO Transport expects information to be sent and delivered in
discrete objects termed Network Service Data Units (NSDU). Although
ISO Transport allows combination of more than one TPDU inside a
single NSDU for the purposes of discussion an NSDU is identical to a
TPDU. Please refer to ISO 8073 for the valid set of concatenated
TPDUs.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 15]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
The protocol described by this memo uses a simple packetization
scheme in order to delimit TPDU. Each packet (TPKT), is viewed as an
object of variable length composed of an integral number of octets.
A TPKT consists of two part:
- a Packet Header
- a TPDU.
The format of the Packet Header is constant regardless of the type of
TPDU. The format of the Packet Header is as follows:
+--------+--------+----------------+-----------....---------------+
|version |reserved| packet length | TPDU |
+----------------------------------------------....---------------+
<8 bits> <8 bits> < 16 bits > < variable length >
where:
- Protocol Version Number
length: 8 bits
Value: 3
- Reserved
length: 8 bits
Value: 0 - (See 'Notes to Implementors' section 6.10)
- Packet Length
length: 16 bits
Value: Length of the entire TPKT in octets, including Packet
Header
- TPDU
ISO Transport TPDU as defined in ISO 8073 and as defined in this
document.
5. Address representations
It is desirable to be able to represent ITOT access point addresses
as:
- Printable strings
- OSI Network Addresses (often known as NSAP addresses
or simply NSAPAs)
This section defines the formats which MUST be used in each case.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 16]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
5.1 String representation of ITOT access point addresses
RFC1278 [RFC1278] defines a general string representation for OSI
Presentation Addresses, including specific reference to RFC1006
addresses which encapsulate IPv4 addresses. RFC1278 is also
applicable to ITOT addresses which encapsulate IPv4 addresses.
This RFC is currently being updated to define a string representation
for ITOT addresses which encapsulate IPv6 addresses.
ITOT access point address string representation specify an IP address
(IPv4 or IPv6) and an optional TCP port number.
5.2 OSI Network Address encoding
RFC1277 [RFC1277] defines a general mechanism to encode addressing
information within OSI Network Addresses (NSAPA), including specific
reference to RFC1006 using IPv4. RFC1277 is also applicable to ITOT
addresses using IPv4.
The RFC "IPv6 addresses inside an NSAPA" [IPv6] defines general
mechanisms for the support of NSAP addressing in an IPv6 network. It
also defines how to embed an IPv6 address inside a OSI NSAP address.
This RFC is applicable to ITOT addresses using IPv6. For ITOT
addresses, the default selector of the NSAPA is defined to have the
value '10000000'B.
It should be noted that given that an IPv6 addresses can encode IPv4
addresses, this format can also encode ITOT addresses using IPv4.
6. Notes to Implementors
6.1 TCP Connection Establishment
Implementors should be aware that ISO transport protocols assume that
they will be told by the network service provider (in this case
TCP/IP) when the network connection being used to transmit their
TPDUs is unexpectedly terminated. It is therefore strongly suggested
that the TCP keep alive mechanism be selected, as this ensures
reporting of network connection loss.
6.2 TCP Data transfer
For performance reason it is suggested that the Nagle algorithm [RFC
896] be disabled (using the TCP_NODELAY socket option). This feature
allows TPKT data to be sent without delay.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 17]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
6.3 Class negotiation
The principle used in Class negotiation is identical to those
described in ISO 8073. Class and options are negotiated during
Connection establishment. The choice made by the Transport will
depend upon the TS-User requirements as expressed via T-CONNECT
service primitives.
The initiator of the Transport Connection proposes a preferred class
and may propose an alternative class.
The responder selects one class defined in the table below.
If the preferred class is not selected then on receipt of the connect
confirm TPDU the initiator adjusts its operation according to the
class selected.
+---------------------------------------------+----------------------+
| Proposed in CR TPDU | CC TPDU |
| | |
|Preferred class | Alternative class | Response |
+--------------------+------------------------+----------------------+
| | | |
|class 0 | none | class 0 |
| | | |
|class 2 | class 0 | class 2 or 0 |
| | | |
|class 2 | none | class 2 |
| | | |
+---------------------------------------------+----------------------+
6.4 Default maximum TPDU size
The default maximum TPDU size value specified in this document breaks
ISO Transport negotiation rule which states that the maximum TPDU
size specified or defaulted by the CC TPDU cannot be greater than the
maximum TPDU size proposed by the CR TPDU.
To avoid the consequences of this, it is strongly recommended that
the CC TPDU always specifies the maximum TPDU size value.
6.5 Class 0 TPDU bit encoding
This protocol no longer allows credit and TPDU-NR (bits 0 to 6)
fields to be ignored on input, which is in line with ISO 8073
encoding rules. RFC1006 TPDU encoding defined inconsistent encoding
rules.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 18]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
6.6 Class 2 Options
Class 2 Additional Option parameter value
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| BIT | OPTION |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| | |
| 8 | Not applicable |
| | |
| 7 | = 1 Use of Non-blocking Expedited Data |
| | = 0 Non-use of Non-blocking Expedited Data (default) |
| | |
|(*) 6 | = 1 Use of Expedited Data Acknowledgement |
| | = 0 non-use of Expedited Data Acknowledgement (default) |
| | |
| 5 | Not applicable |
| | |
|(*) 4 | = 1 Use of Reverse Connection procedure |
| | = 0 Use of Forward Connection procedure (default) |
| | |
| 3 | Not applicable |
| | |
| 2 | Not applicable |
| | |
| 1 | = 1 Use of Transport Expedited Data Service |
| | = 0 Non-use of Transport Expedited Data Service (default) |
| | |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
(*) In ISO 8073, bit 4 is defined as use of "Network Expedited" and
bit 6 is defined as "Request Acknowledgement".
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 19]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
Class 2 Options Profile
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Bits Service selected |
| 1 4 6 7 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 x x x Non-use of Transport Expedited Data Service |
| ---------------------------------------------------------|
| Bits 4 6 7 are not applicable (*) |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| 1 x x x Use of Transport Expedited Data Service |
| ---------------------------------------------------------|
| 1 0 x x Use of Expedited Data Service with Forward Connection|
| -----------------------------------------------------|
| 1 0 1 0 Forward Connection with Expedited Data |
| Acknowledgement |
| 1 0 1 1 Forward Connection with Expedited Data |
| Acknowledgement and use of Non-blocking |
| Expedited Data (**) |
| --------------------------------------------|
| 1 0 0 0 Forward Connection with non-use of Expedited|
| Data Acknowledgement (***) |
| 1 0 0 1 Forward Connection with non-use of Expedited|
| Data Acknowledgement and use of Non-blocking|
| Expedited Data |
| -----------------------------------------------------|
| 1 1 x x Use of Expedited Data Service with Reverse Connection|
| -----------------------------------------------------|
| 1 1 1 0 Reverse Connection with Expedited Data |
| Acknowledgement |
| 1 1 1 1 Reverse Connection with Expedited Data |
| Acknowledgement and use of Non-blocking |
| Expedited Data (**) |
| --------------------------------------------|
| 1 1 0 0 Reverse Connection with non-use of Expedited|
| Data Acknowledgement (***) |
| 1 1 0 1 Reverse Connection with non-use of Expedited|
| Data Acknowledgement and use of Non-blocking|
| Expedited Data |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
(*) Note the default (0000) provides an RFC1006-like service with
Explicit Transport Disconnection.
(**) Note in this case use of Expedited Data Acknowledgement with use
of Non-blocking Expedited Data is a wasted effort (See section 6.5)
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 20]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
(***) Note in this case Normal and Expedited Data TPDU are not
synchronised. (See section 6.6)
6.7 Class 2 Expedited Data Acknowledgement
The Protocol specified in this document does not define any
relationship between use of "Expedited Data Acknowledgement" option
and use of "Non-blocking Expedited Data" service.
However please note that when using "Non-blocking Expedited Data"
service it is a wasted effort to use "Expedited Data
Acknowledgement", since ED TPDUs are duplicated and sent on both the
Normal Data and Expedited Data TCP connections.
6.8 Class 2 Normal Data and Expedited Data handling
There exist two separate application requirements for using Expedited
Data:
1- Synchronisation of the order of delivery between Normal
and Expedited Data TPDU.
2- Independence of Normal and Expedited data channels. A busy
Normal Data channel should not block an Expedited Data channel.
The protocol described in this document can accommodate both
requirements, separately or in combination.
Synchronisation:
If synchronised order of delivery between Normal and Expedited
Data TPDU is required then use of either "Expedited Data
Acknowledgement" TPDU or use of the "Non-blocking Expedited Data"
service must be negotiated during connection establishment.
If synchronised order of delivery between Normal and Expedited
Data TPDU is not required then non-use of "Expedited Data
Acknowledgement" need not be negotiated during connection
establishment.
Independence:
If Independence of Normal and Expedited data channels is required
then Forward or Reverse connection must be negotiated during
connection establishment. Expedited data TPDU must be sent on the
Expedited data channel.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 21]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
If Independence of Normal and Expedited data channels is not
required then Forward connection should be negotiated during
connection establishment and the Expedited data channels should
never be established. Expedited data TPDU is then sent inband on
the Normal data channel.
Finally please note that independence of Normal and Expedited data
channels without synchronisation relaxes the Transport Service
definition of Expedited data and is not consistent with ISO 8072.
6.9 Class 2 Forward Connection procedure
As defined in ISO 8073, when "Forward Connection" (Splitting and
Recombining) procedure is used for Expedited Data transmission, ED
TPDU must only be sent over an outgoing NS-provider TCP connection.
As defined in ISO 8073, this document does not mandates use of the
Splitting procedure for Expedited Data transmission. The
Recombination procedure, which associates Data (normal and expedited)
TPDUs arriving for a transport connection over two TCP connections
must be handled.
It is legal to send Expedited Data TPDU inband on the Normal Data TCP
connection.
Please note that the protocol specified in this document does not
define when an Expedited Data TCP connection should be established.
This is an implementation choice.
When using "Non-blocking Expedited Data" service it is recommended to
not delay establishing Expedited Data TCP connection.
6.10 TPKT
This document specifies the value of the TPKT reserved field.
Implementation should not interpret and act upon any value in a
reserved field. To avoid Interoperability issues with RFC1006, this
field should be ignored on input.
7. Rationale - Interoperability with RFC1006
We have chosen to maintain the same TPKT protocol version in ITOT as
in RFC1006 (version 3). The reason for this decision is that the
changes in this document do not conflict with RFC1006. If we were to
change the protocol version we would prevent existing RFC1006
implementations which mandate version 3 from interoperating with the
protocol defined in this document.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 22]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
One consequence of this decision relates to class negotiation. The
protocol described in this document introduces Class 2 over TCP, and
it therefore introduces the need to be able to perform class
negotiation between Class 2 and Class 0. While all Transport
implementations should be able to handle Class negotiation, we
recognise that some RFC1006 implementations cannot. Therefore
Implementors should be aware that Class 2 Connect Request (with no
Alternative class) could be accepted with a Class 0 Connect Confirm,
at which point the Connect Confirm should be rejected as specified in
ISO 8073.
8. Security Considerations
Security issues are not specifically addressed in this document.
Operation of this protocol is no more and no less secure than
operation of TCP and ISO 8073 protocols. The reader is directed there
for further reading.
Acknowledgements
The authors are pleased to acknowledge the suggestions and comments
of Harald T. Alvestrand, Jim Bound, John Day, Mike Dyer, Peter
Furniss, Dan Harrington, Steve Kille, Keith G. Knightson, Keith
Sklower, Matt Thomas, Robert Watson and many other members of the
IETF TOSI mailing list. The support of Allison Mankin of the IESG was
essential.
References
[ISO8072] ISO. "International Standard 8072. Information Processing
Systems - Open Systems Interconnection: Transport Service
Definition."
[ISO8073] ISO. "International Standard 8073. Information Processing
Systems - Open Systems Interconnection: Transport Protocol
Specification." ISO 8073:1992 and 8073:1992/Amd.5:1995.
[ISO8348] ISO. "International Standard 8348. Information Processing
Systems - Open Systems Interconnection: Network Service
Definition."
[RFC791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791,
September 1981.
[RFC793] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7,
RFC 793, September 1981.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 23]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
[RFC896] Nagle, J., "Congestion Control in IP/TCP Inertnetworks",
RFC 896, January 1984.
[RFC1006] Rose, M., and D. Cass, "ISO Transport Services on Top of
the TCP Version 3", STD 35, RFC 1006, May 1987.
[RFC1277] Hardcastle-Kille, S., "Encoding Network Addresses to
support operation over non-OSI lower layers", RFC 1277,
November 1991.
[RFC1278] Hardcastle-Kille, S., "String encoding of Presentation
Address", RFC 1278, November 1991.
A string encoding of Presentation Address
update to RFC1278, Work in Progress.
[RFC1859] Pouffary, Y., "ISO Transport Class 2 Non-use of Explicit
Flow Control over TCP - RFC1006 extension", RFC 1859,
October 1995.
[IPV6] Deering, S., and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", RFC 1883, December 1995.
Hinden,, R., and S. Deeing, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 1884, December 1995.
Bound, J., Carpenter, B., Harrington, D., Houldsworth, J.,
and A. Lloyd, "OSI NSAPs and IPv6", RFC 1888, August 1996.
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 24]
RFC 2126 ISO Transport on top of TCP March 1997
Authors' Addresses
Yanick Pouffary
End Systems Networking
Digital Equipment Corporation
Centre Technique (Europe)
B.P. 027
950 Routes des colles
06901 Sophia antipolis, France
Phone: +33 92-95-62-85
Fax: +33 92-95-62-35
EMail: pouffary@taec.enet.dec.com
Alan Young
ISODE Consortium
The Dome
The Square
Richmond, UK
Phone: +44 181 332 9091
Fax: +44 181 332 9019
EMail: A.Young@isode.com
Pouffary & Young Standards Track [Page 25]