3.2. Discussion
Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
3.2. Discussion
Up:
Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
Up:
Requests For Comments
Up:
RFC 791
Up:
3. SPECIFICATION
Prev: 3.1. Internet Header Format
Next: 3.3. Interfaces
3.2. Discussion
3.2. Discussion
The implementation of a protocol must be robust. Each implementation
must expect to interoperate with others created by different
individuals. While the goal of this specification is to be explicit
about the protocol there is the possibility of differing
interpretations. In general, an implementation must be conservative
in its sending behavior, and liberal in its receiving behavior. That
is, it must be careful to send well-formed datagrams, but must accept
any datagram that it can interpret (e.g., not object to technical
errors where the meaning is still clear).
The basic internet service is datagram oriented and provides for the
fragmentation of datagrams at gateways, with reassembly taking place
at the destination internet protocol module in the destination host.
Of course, fragmentation and reassembly of datagrams within a network
or by private agreement between the gateways of a network is also
allowed since this is transparent to the internet protocols and the
higher-level protocols. This transparent type of fragmentation and
reassembly is termed "network-dependent" (or intranet) fragmentation
and is not discussed further here.
Internet addresses distinguish sources and destinations to the host
level and provide a protocol field as well. It is assumed that each
protocol will provide for whatever multiplexing is necessary within a
host.
Addressing
To provide for flexibility in assigning address to networks and
allow for the large number of small to intermediate sized networks
the interpretation of the address field is coded to specify a small
number of networks with a large number of host, a moderate number of
networks with a moderate number of hosts, and a large number of
networks with a small number of hosts. In addition there is an
escape code for extended addressing mode.
Address Formats:
High Order Bits Format Class
--------------- ------------------------------- -----
0 7 bits of net, 24 bits of host a
10 14 bits of net, 16 bits of host b
110 21 bits of net, 8 bits of host c
111 escape to extended addressing mode
A value of zero in the network field means this network. This is
only used in certain ICMP messages. The extended addressing mode
is undefined. Both of these features are reserved for future use.
The actual values assigned for network addresses is given in
"Assigned Numbers" [9].
The local address, assigned by the local network, must allow for a
single physical host to act as several distinct internet hosts.
That is, there must be a mapping between internet host addresses and
network/host interfaces that allows several internet addresses to
correspond to one interface. It must also be allowed for a host to
have several physical interfaces and to treat the datagrams from
several of them as if they were all addressed to a single host.
Address mappings between internet addresses and addresses for
ARPANET, SATNET, PRNET, and other networks are described in "Address
Mappings" [5].
Fragmentation and Reassembly
The internet identification field (ID) is used together with the
source and destination address, and the protocol fields, to identify
datagram fragments for reassembly.
The More Fragments flag bit (MF) is set if the datagram is not the
last fragment. The Fragment Offset field identifies the fragment
location, relative to the beginning of the original unfragmented
datagram. Fragments are counted in units of 8 octets. The
fragmentation strategy is designed so than an unfragmented datagram
has all zero fragmentation information (MF = 0, fragment offset =
0). If an internet datagram is fragmented, its data portion must be
broken on 8 octet boundaries.
This format allows 2**13 = 8192 fragments of 8 octets each for a
total of 65,536 octets. Note that this is consistent with the the
datagram total length field (of course, the header is counted in the
total length and not in the fragments).
When fragmentation occurs, some options are copied, but others
remain with the first fragment only.
Every internet module must be able to forward a datagram of 68
octets without further fragmentation. This is because an internet
header may be up to 60 octets, and the minimum fragment is 8 octets.
Every internet destination must be able to receive a datagram of 576
octets either in one piece or in fragments to be reassembled.
The fields which may be affected by fragmentation include:
(1) options field
(2) more fragments flag
(3) fragment offset
(4) internet header length field
(5) total length field
(6) header checksum
If the Don't Fragment flag (DF) bit is set, then internet
fragmentation of this datagram is NOT permitted, although it may be
discarded. This can be used to prohibit fragmentation in cases
where the receiving host does not have sufficient resources to
reassemble internet fragments.
One example of use of the Don't Fragment feature is to down line
load a small host. A small host could have a boot strap program
that accepts a datagram stores it in memory and then executes it.
The fragmentation and reassembly procedures are most easily
described by examples. The following procedures are example
implementations.
General notation in the following pseudo programs: "=<" means "less
than or equal", "#" means "not equal", "=" means "equal", "<-" means
"is set to". Also, "x to y" includes x and excludes y; for example,
"4 to 7" would include 4, 5, and 6 (but not 7).
An Example Fragmentation Procedure
The maximum sized datagram that can be transmitted through the
next network is called the maximum transmission unit (MTU).
If the total length is less than or equal the maximum transmission
unit then submit this datagram to the next step in datagram
processing; otherwise cut the datagram into two fragments, the
first fragment being the maximum size, and the second fragment
being the rest of the datagram. The first fragment is submitted
to the next step in datagram processing, while the second fragment
is submitted to this procedure in case it is still too large.
Notation:
FO - Fragment Offset
IHL - Internet Header Length
DF - Don't Fragment flag
MF - More Fragments flag
TL - Total Length
OFO - Old Fragment Offset
OIHL - Old Internet Header Length
OMF - Old More Fragments flag
OTL - Old Total Length
NFB - Number of Fragment Blocks
MTU - Maximum Transmission Unit
Procedure:
IF TL =< MTU THEN Submit this datagram to the next step
in datagram processing ELSE IF DF = 1 THEN discard the
datagram ELSE
To produce the first fragment:
(1) Copy the original internet header;
(2) OIHL <- IHL; OTL <- TL; OFO <- FO; OMF <- MF;
(3) NFB <- (MTU-IHL*4)/8;
(4) Attach the first NFB*8 data octets;
(5) Correct the header:
MF <- 1; TL <- (IHL*4)+(NFB*8);
Recompute Checksum;
(6) Submit this fragment to the next step in
datagram processing;
To produce the second fragment:
(7) Selectively copy the internet header (some options
are not copied, see option definitions);
(8) Append the remaining data;
(9) Correct the header:
IHL <- (((OIHL*4)-(length of options not copied))+3)/4;
TL <- OTL - NFB*8 - (OIHL-IHL)*4);
FO <- OFO + NFB; MF <- OMF; Recompute Checksum;
(10) Submit this fragment to the fragmentation test; DONE.
In the above procedure each fragment (except the last) was made
the maximum allowable size. An alternative might produce less
than the maximum size datagrams. For example, one could implement
a fragmentation procedure that repeatly divided large datagrams in
half until the resulting fragments were less than the maximum
transmission unit size.
An Example Reassembly Procedure
For each datagram the buffer identifier is computed as the
concatenation of the source, destination, protocol, and
identification fields. If this is a whole datagram (that is both
the fragment offset and the more fragments fields are zero), then
any reassembly resources associated with this buffer identifier
are released and the datagram is forwarded to the next step in
datagram processing.
If no other fragment with this buffer identifier is on hand then
reassembly resources are allocated. The reassembly resources
consist of a data buffer, a header buffer, a fragment block bit
table, a total data length field, and a timer. The data from the
fragment is placed in the data buffer according to its fragment
offset and length, and bits are set in the fragment block bit
table corresponding to the fragment blocks received.
If this is the first fragment (that is the fragment offset is
zero) this header is placed in the header buffer. If this is the
last fragment ( that is the more fragments field is zero) the
total data length is computed. If this fragment completes the
datagram (tested by checking the bits set in the fragment block
table), then the datagram is sent to the next step in datagram
processing; otherwise the timer is set to the maximum of the
current timer value and the value of the time to live field from
this fragment; and the reassembly routine gives up control.
If the timer runs out, the all reassembly resources for this
buffer identifier are released. The initial setting of the timer
is a lower bound on the reassembly waiting time. This is because
the waiting time will be increased if the Time to Live in the
arriving fragment is greater than the current timer value but will
not be decreased if it is less. The maximum this timer value
could reach is the maximum time to live (approximately 4.25
minutes). The current recommendation for the initial timer
setting is 15 seconds. This may be changed as experience with
this protocol accumulates. Note that the choice of this parameter
value is related to the buffer capacity available and the data
rate of the transmission medium; that is, data rate times timer
value equals buffer size (e.g., 10Kb/s X 15s = 150Kb).
Notation:
FO - Fragment Offset
IHL - Internet Header Length
MF - More Fragments flag
TTL - Time To Live
NFB - Number of Fragment Blocks
TL - Total Length
TDL - Total Data Length
BUFID - Buffer Identifier
RCVBT - Fragment Received Bit Table
TLB - Timer Lower Bound
Procedure:
(1) BUFID <- source|destination|protocol|identification;
(2) IF FO = 0 AND MF = 0
(3) THEN IF buffer with BUFID is allocated
(4) THEN flush all reassembly for this BUFID;
(5) Submit datagram to next step; DONE.
(6) ELSE IF no buffer with BUFID is allocated
(7) THEN allocate reassembly resources
with BUFID;
TIMER <- TLB; TDL <- 0;
(8) put data from fragment into data buffer with
BUFID from octet FO*8 to
octet (TL-(IHL*4))+FO*8;
(9) set RCVBT bits from FO
to FO+((TL-(IHL*4)+7)/8);
(10) IF MF = 0 THEN TDL <- TL-(IHL*4)+(FO*8)
(11) IF FO = 0 THEN put header in header buffer
(12) IF TDL # 0
(13) AND all RCVBT bits from 0
to (TDL+7)/8 are set
(14) THEN TL <- TDL+(IHL*4)
(15) Submit datagram to next step;
(16) free all reassembly resources
for this BUFID; DONE.
(17) TIMER <- MAX(TIMER,TTL);
(18) give up until next fragment or timer expires;
(19) timer expires: flush all reassembly with this BUFID; DONE.
In the case that two or more fragments contain the same data
either identically or through a partial overlap, this procedure
will use the more recently arrived copy in the data buffer and
datagram delivered.
Identification
The choice of the Identifier for a datagram is based on the need to
provide a way to uniquely identify the fragments of a particular
datagram. The protocol module assembling fragments judges fragments
to belong to the same datagram if they have the same source,
destination, protocol, and Identifier. Thus, the sender must choose
the Identifier to be unique for this source, destination pair and
protocol for the time the datagram (or any fragment of it) could be
alive in the internet.
It seems then that a sending protocol module needs to keep a table
of Identifiers, one entry for each destination it has communicated
with in the last maximum packet lifetime for the internet.
However, since the Identifier field allows 65,536 different values,
some host may be able to simply use unique identifiers independent
of destination.
It is appropriate for some higher level protocols to choose the
identifier. For example, TCP protocol modules may retransmit an
identical TCP segment, and the probability for correct reception
would be enhanced if the retransmission carried the same identifier
as the original transmission since fragments of either datagram
could be used to construct a correct TCP segment.
Type of Service
The type of service (TOS) is for internet service quality selection.
The type of service is specified along the abstract parameters
precedence, delay, throughput, and reliability. These abstract
parameters are to be mapped into the actual service parameters of
the particular networks the datagram traverses.
Precedence. An independent measure of the importance of this
datagram.
Delay. Prompt delivery is important for datagrams with this
indication.
Throughput. High data rate is important for datagrams with this
indication.
Reliability. A higher level of effort to ensure delivery is
important for datagrams with this indication.
For example, the ARPANET has a priority bit, and a choice between
"standard" messages (type 0) and "uncontrolled" messages (type 3),
(the choice between single packet and multipacket messages can also
be considered a service parameter). The uncontrolled messages tend
to be less reliably delivered and suffer less delay. Suppose an
internet datagram is to be sent through the ARPANET. Let the
internet type of service be given as:
Precedence: 5
Delay: 0
Throughput: 1
Reliability: 1
In this example, the mapping of these parameters to those available
for the ARPANET would be to set the ARPANET priority bit on since
the Internet precedence is in the upper half of its range, to select
standard messages since the throughput and reliability requirements
are indicated and delay is not. More details are given on service
mappings in "Service Mappings" [8].
Time to Live
The time to live is set by the sender to the maximum time the
datagram is allowed to be in the internet system. If the datagram
is in the internet system longer than the time to live, then the
datagram must be destroyed.
This field must be decreased at each point that the internet header
is processed to reflect the time spent processing the datagram.
Even if no local information is available on the time actually
spent, the field must be decremented by 1. The time is measured in
units of seconds (i.e. the value 1 means one second). Thus, the
maximum time to live is 255 seconds or 4.25 minutes. Since every
module that processes a datagram must decrease the TTL by at least
one even if it process the datagram in less than a second, the TTL
must be thought of only as an upper bound on the time a datagram may
exist. The intention is to cause undeliverable datagrams to be
discarded, and to bound the maximum datagram lifetime.
Some higher level reliable connection protocols are based on
assumptions that old duplicate datagrams will not arrive after a
certain time elapses. The TTL is a way for such protocols to have
an assurance that their assumption is met.
Options
The options are optional in each datagram, but required in
implementations. That is, the presence or absence of an option is
the choice of the sender, but each internet module must be able to
parse every option. There can be several options present in the
option field.
The options might not end on a 32-bit boundary. The internet header
must be filled out with octets of zeros. The first of these would
be interpreted as the end-of-options option, and the remainder as
internet header padding.
Every internet module must be able to act on every option. The
Security Option is required if classified, restricted, or
compartmented traffic is to be passed.
Checksum
The internet header checksum is recomputed if the internet header is
changed. For example, a reduction of the time to live, additions or
changes to internet options, or due to fragmentation. This checksum
at the internet level is intended to protect the internet header
fields from transmission errors.
There are some applications where a few data bit errors are
acceptable while retransmission delays are not. If the internet
protocol enforced data correctness such applications could not be
supported.
Errors
Internet protocol errors may be reported via the ICMP messages [3].
Next: 3.3. Interfaces
Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
3.2. Discussion
| 
