Skip to main content

RFC 824 - DOS-26 Rev A Virtual Local Network

  • Status: Unknown
  • Stream: stream
  • Errata: No Errata

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

                  THE CRONUS VIRTUAL LOCAL NETWORK

                        William I. MacGregor
                          Daniel C. Tappan
                    Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc.

                           25 August 1982

  [The purpose of this note is to describe the CRONUS Virtual
  Local Network, especially the addressing related features.
  These features include a method for mapping between Internet
  Addresses and Local Network addresses.  This is a topic of
  current concern in the ARPA Internet community.  This note is
  intended to stimulate discussion.  This is not a specification
  of an Internet Standard.]

  1  Purpose and Scope

       This note defines the Cronus (1) Virtual Local Network

  (VLN), a facility which provides interhost message transport to

  the Cronus Distributed Operating System.  The VLN consists of a

  'client interface specification' and an 'implementation'; the

  client interface is expected to be available on every Cronus

  host.  Client processes can send and receive datagrams using

  specific, broadcast, or multicast addressing as defined in the

  interface specification.

  _______________
  (1) The Cronus Distributed Operating System is being designed  by
  Bolt  Beranek  and Newman Inc., as a component of the Distributed
  Systems Technology Program  sponsored  by  Rome  Air  Development
  Center.   This work is supported by the DOS Design/Implementation
  contract, F30602-81-C-0132.

                                  1

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

       From the viewpoint of other Cronus system software and

  application programs, the VLN stands in place of a direct

  interface to the physical local network (PLN).  This additional

  level of abstraction is defined to meet two major system

  objectives:

    *  COMPATIBILITY.  The VLN defines a communication facility
       which is compatible with the Internet Protocol (IP)
       developed by DARPA; by implication the VLN is compatible
       with higher-level protocols such as the Transmission Control
       Protocol (TCP) based on IP.

    *  SUBSTITUTABILITY.  Cronus software built above the VLN is
       dependent only upon the VLN interface and not its
       implementation.  It is possible to substitute one physical
       local network for another in the VLN implementation,
       provided that the VLN interface semantics are maintained.

       (This note assumes the reader is familiar with the concepts

  and terminology of the DARPA Internet Program; reference [6] is a

  compilation of the important protocol specifications and other

  documents.  Documents in [6] of special significance here are [5]

  and [4].)

       The compatibility goal is motivated by factors relating to

  the Cronus design and its development environment.  A large body

  of software has evolved, and continues to evolve, in the internet

  community fostered by DARPA.  For example, the compatibility goal

                                  2

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  permits the Cronus design to assimilate existing software

  components providing electronic mail, remote terminal access, and

  file transfer in a straightforward manner.  In addition to the

  roles of such services in the Cronus system, they are needed as

  support for the design and development process.  The prototype

  Cronus cluster, called the Advanced Development Model (ADM), will

  be connected to the ARPANET, and it is important that the ADM

  conform to the standards and conventions of the DARPA internet

  community.

       The substitutability goal reflects the belief that different

  instances of the Cronus cluster will utilize different physical

  local networks.  Substitution may be desirable for reasons of

  cost, performance, or other properties of the physical local

  network such as mechanical and electrical ruggedness.  The

  existence of the VLN interface definition suggests a procedure

  for physical local network substitution, namely, re-

  implementation of the VLN interface on each Cronus host.  The

  implementations will be functionally equivalent but can be

  expected to differ along dimensions not specified by the VLN

  interface definition.  Since different physical local networks

                                  3

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  are often quite similar, the task of "re-implementing" the VLN is

  probably much less difficult than building the first

  implementation; small modifications to an existing, exemplary

  implementation may suffice.

       The concepts of the Cronus VLN, and in particular the VLN

  implementation based on Ethernet described in Section 4, have

  significance beyond their application in the Cronus system.  Many

  organizations are now beginning to install local networks and

  immediately confront the compatibility issue.  For a number of

  universities, for example, the compatibility problem is precisely

  the interoperability of the Ethernet and the DARPA internet.

  Although perhaps less immediate, the substitutability issue will

  also be faced by other organizations as local network technology

  advances, and the transfer of existing system and application

  software to a new physical local network base becomes an economic

  necessity.

       Figure 1 shows the position of the VLN in the lowest layers

  of the Cronus protocol hierarchy.  The VLN interface

  specification given in the next section is actually a meta-

  specification, like the specifications of IP and TCP, in that the

                                  4

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  programming details of the interface are host-dependent and

  unspecified.  The precise representation of the VLN data

  structures and operations can be expected to vary from machine to

  machine, but the functional capabilities of the interface are the

  same regardless of the host.

                                 .
                                 .
                |                .                  |
                |-----------------------------------|
                | Transmission  |  User      |      |
                | Control       |  Datagram  | ...  |
                | Protocol      |  Protocol  |      |
                |-----------------------------------|
                |        Internet Protocol          |
                |              (IP)                 |
                |-----------------------------------|
                |      Virtual Local Network        |
                |             (VLN)                 |
                |-----------------------------------|
                |      Physical Local Network       |
                |       (PLN, e.g. Ethernet)        |
                 -----------------------------------

                 Figure 1 . Cronus Protocol Layering

       The VLN is completely compatible with the Internet Protocol

  as defined in [5], i.e., no changes or extensions to IP are

                                  5

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  required to implement IP above the VLN.  In fact, this was a

  requirement on the VLN design; a consequence was the timely

  completion of the VLN design and avoidance of the lengthy delays

  which often accompany attempts to change or extend a widely-

  accepted standard.

       The following sections define the VLN client interface and

  illustrate how the VLN implementation might be organized for an

  Ethernet PLN.

  2  The VLN-to-Client Interface

       The VLN layer provides a datagram transport service among

  hosts in a Cronus 'cluster', and between these hosts and other

  hosts in the DARPA internet.  The hosts belonging to a cluster

  are directly attached to the same physical local network, but the

  VLN hides the peculiarities of the PLN from other Cronus

  software.  Communication with hosts outside the cluster is

  achieved through some number of 'internet gateways', shown in

  Figure 2, connected to the cluster.  The VLN layer is responsible

                                  6

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  for routing datagrams to a gateway if they are addressed to hosts

  outside the cluster, and for delivering incoming datagrams to the

  appropriate VLN host.  A VLN is viewed as a network in the

  internet, and thus has an internet network number.  (2)

  _______________
  (2) The PLN could possess its own network number, different  from
  the  network  number  of  the  VLN  it implements, or the network
  numbers could be the same.  Different  numbers  would  complicate
  the  gateways  somewhat,  but  are  consistent  with  the VLN and
  internet models.

                                  7

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

                 to internet
                  network X
                      |
                      |
        -----       -----       -----       -----
       |host1|     |gtwyA|     |host2|     |host3|
        -----       -----       -----       -----
          |           |           |           |
      --------------------------------------------------
              |           |           |           |
            -----       -----       -----       -----
           |host4|     |host5|     |gtwyB|     |host6|
            -----       -----       -----       -----
                                      |
                                      |
                                 to internet
                                  network Y

             Figure 2 . A Virtual Local Network Cluster

       The VLN interface will have one client process on each host,

  normally the host's IP implementation.  The one "client process"

  may, in fact, be composed of several host processes; but the VLN

  layer will not distinguish among them, i.e., it performs no

  multiplexing/demultiplexing function.  (3)
  _______________
  (3) In the  Cronus  system,  multiplexing/demultiplexing  of  the
  datagram  stream  will be performed above the IP level, primarily

                                  8

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

       The structure of messages which pass through the VLN

  interface between client processes and the VLN implementation is

  identical to the structure of internet datagrams constructed in

  accordance with the Internet Protocol.  Any representation for

  internet datagrams is also a satisfactory representation for VLN

  datagrams, and in practice this representation will vary from

  host to host.  The VLN definition merely asserts that there is

  ONE well-defined representation for internet datagrams, and thus

  VLN datagrams, on any host supporting the VLN interface.  The

  argument name "Datagram" in the VLN operation definitions below

  refers to this well-defined but host-dependent datagram

  representation.

       The VLN guarantees that a datagram of 576 or fewer octets

  (i.e., the Total Length field of its internet header is less than

  or equal to 576) can be transferred between any two VLN clients.

  Larger datagrams may be transferred between some client pairs.

  Clients should generally avoid sending datagrams exceeding 576

  octets unless there is clear need to do so, and the sender is

  certain that all hosts involved can process the outsize
  _______________
  in conjunction with Cronus object management.

                                  9

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  datagrams.

       The representation of an VLN datagram is unconstrained by

  the VLN specification, and the VLN implementor has many

  reasonable alternatives.  Perhaps the simplest representation is

  a contiguous block of memory locations, either passed by

  reference or copied across the VLN-to-client interface.  It may

  be beneficial to represent a datagram as a linked list instead,

  however, in order to reduce the number of times datagram text is

  copied as the datagram passes through the protocol hierarchy at

  the sending and receiving hosts.  When a message is passing down

  (towards the physical layer) it is successively "wrapped" by the

  protocol layers.  Addition of the "wrapper"--header and trailer

  fields--can be done without copying the message text if the

  header and trailer can be linked into the message representation.

  In the particular, when an IP implementation is the client of the

  VLN layer a linked structure is also desirable to permit

  'reassembly' of datagrams (the merger of several 'fragment'

  datagrams into one larger datagram) inside the IP layer without

  copying data repeatedly.  If properly designed, one linked list

  structure can speed up both wrapping/unwrapping and datagram

                                 10

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  reassembly in the IP layer.

       Although the structure of internet and VLN datagrams is

  identical, the VLN-to-client interface places its own

  interpretation on internet header fields, and differs from the

  IP-to-client interface in significant respects:

    1.  The VLN layer utilizes only the Source Address, Destination
        Address, Total Length, and Header Checksum fields in the
        internet datagram; other fields are accurately transmitted
        from the sending to the receiving client.

    2.  Internet datagram fragmentation and reassembly is not
        performed in the VLN layer, nor does the VLN layer
        implement any aspect of internet datagram option
        processing.

    3.  At the VLN interface, a special interpretation is placed
        upon the Destination Address in the internet header, which
        allows VLN broadcast and multicast addresses to be encoded
        in the internet address structure.

    4.  With high probability, duplicate delivery of datagrams sent
        between hosts on the same VLN does not occur.

    5.  Between two VLN clients S and R in the same Cronus cluster,
        the sequence of datagrams received by R is a subsequence of
        the sequence sent by S to R; a stronger sequencing property
        holds for broadcast and multicast addressing.

                                 11

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  2.1  VLN Addressing

       In the DARPA internet an 'internet address' is defined to be

  a 32 bit quantity which is partitioned into two fields, a network

  number and a 'local address'.  VLN addresses share this basic

  structure, and are perceived by hosts outside the Cronus system

  as ordinary internet addresses.  A sender outside a Cronus

  cluster may direct an internet datagram into the cluster by

  specifying the VLN network number in the network number field of

  the destination address; senders in the cluster may transmit

  messages to internet hosts outside the cluster in a similar way.

  The VLN in a Cronus cluster, however, attaches special meaning to

  the local address field of a VLN address, as explained below.

       Each network in the internet community is assigned a

  'class', either A, B, or C, and a network number in its class.

  The partitioning of the 32 bit internet address into network

  number and local address fields is a function of the class of the

  network number, as follows:

                                 12

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

                           Width of            Width of
                         Network Number      Local Address

          Class A            7 bits             24 bits

          Class B           14 bits             16 bits

          Class C           21 bits              8 bits

                  Table 1. Internet Address Formats

  The bits not included in the network number or local address

  fields encode the network class, e.g., a 3 bit prefix of 110

  designates a class C address (see [4]).

       The interpretation of the local address field of an internet

  address is the responsibility of the network designated in the

  network number field.  In the ARPANET (a class A network, with

  network number 10) the local address refers to a specific

  physical host; this is the most common use of the local address

  field.  VLN addresses, in contrast, may refer to all hosts

  (broadcast) or groups of hosts (multicast) in a Cronus cluster,

  as well as specific hosts inside or outside of the Cluster.

  Specific, broadcast, and multicast addresses are all encoded in

                                 13

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  the VLN local address field.  (4)

       The meaning of the local address field of a VLN address is

  defined in the table below.

          ADDRESS MODES         VLN LOCAL ADDRESS VALUES

          Specific Host             0     to  1,023

          Multicast                 1,024 to 65,534

          Broadcast                          65,535

                  Table 2. VLN Local Address Modes

  In order to represent the full range of specific, broadcast, and

  multicast addresses in the local address field, a VLN network

  should be either class A or class B.  If a VLN is a class A

  internet network, a VLN local address occupies the low-order 16

  bits of the 24 bit internet local address field, and the upper 8

  bits of the internet local address are zero.  If a VLN is a class
  _______________
  (4) The ability of hosts outside a  Cronus  cluster  to  transmit
  datagrams  with  VLN broadcast or multicast destination addresses
  into the cluster may be restricted by the cluster gateway(s), for
  reasons of system security.

                                 14

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  B network, the internet local address field is fully utilized by

  the VLN local address.

  2.2  VLN Operations

       There are seven operations defined at the VLN interface and

  available to the VLN client on each host.  An implementation of

  the VLN interface has wide lattitude in the presentation of these

  operations to the client; for example, the operations may or may

  not return error codes.

       A VLN implementation may define the operations to occur

  synchronously or asynchronously with respect to the client's

  computation.  We expect that the ResetVLNInterface, MyVLNAddress,

  SendVLNDatagram, PurgeMAddresses, AttendMAddress, and

  IgnoreMAddress operations will usually be synchronous with

  respect to the client, but ReceiveVLNDatagram will usually be

  asynchronous, i.e., the client may initiate the operation,

  continue to compute, and at some later time be notified that a

  datagram is available.  (The alternatives to asynchronous

                                 15

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  ReceiveVLNDatagram are A) a blocking receive operation; and B) a

  non-blocking but synchronous receive operation, which returns a

  failure code immediately if a datagram is not available.  Either

  alternative may satisfy particular requirements, but an

  asynchronous receive subsumes these and is more generally

  useful.) At a minimum, the client must have fully synchronous

  access to each of the operations; more elaborate mechanisms may

  be provided at the option of the VLN implementation.

  VLN OPERATIONS

      ResetVLNInterface

          The VLN layer for this host is reset (e.g., for the
          Ethernet VLN implementation the operation ClearVPMap is
          performed, and a frame of type "Cronus VLN" and subtype
          "Mapping Update" is broadcast; see Section 4.2).  This
          operation does not affect the set of attended VLN
          multicast addresses.

      function MyVLNAddress()

          Returns the specific VLN address of this host; this can
          always be done without communication with any other host.

      SendVLNDatagram(Datagram)

          When this operation completes, the VLN layer has copied
          the Datagram and it is either "in transmission" or
          "delivered", i.e., the transmitting process cannot assume
          that the message has been delivered when SendVLNDatagram

                                 16

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

          completes.

      ReceiveVLNDatagram(Datagram)

          When this operation completes, Datagram is a
          representation of a VLN datagram sent by a VLN client and
          not previously received by the client invoking
          ReceiveVLNDatagram.

      PurgeMAddresses()

          When this operation completes, no VLN multicast addresses
          are registered with the local VLN component.

      function AttendMAddress(MAddress)

          If this operation returns True then MAddress, which must
          be a VLN multicast address, is registered as an "alias"
          for this host, and messages addressed to MAddress by VLN
          clients will be delivered to the client on this host.

      IgnoreMAddress(MAddress)

          When this operation completes, MAddress is not registered
          as a multicast address for the client on this host.

       Whenever a Cronus host comes up, ResetVLNInterface and

  PurgeMAddresses are performed implicitly by the VLN layer before

  it will accept a request from the client or incoming traffic from

  the PLN.  They may also be invoked by the client during normal

  operation.  As described in Section 4.2 below, a VLN component

  may depend upon state information obtained dynamically from other

  hosts, and there is a possibility that incorrect information

                                 17

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  might enter a component's state tables.  (This might happen, for

  example, if the PLN address of a Cronus host were changed but its

  VLN address preserved--the old VLN-to-PLN address mappings held

  by other hosts would then be incorrect.) A cautious VLN client

  could call ResetVLNInterface at periodic intervals (every hour,

  say) to force the VLN component to reconstitute its dynamic

  tables.

       A VLN component will place a limit on the number of

  multicast addresses to which it will simultaneously "attend"; if

  the client attempts to register more addresses than this,

  AttendMAddress will return False with no other effect.  The

  actual limit will vary among VLN components, but it will usually

  be between 10 and 100 multicast addresses.  Components may

  implement limits as large as the entire multicast address space

  (64,511 addresses).

       The VLN layer does not guarantee any minimum amount of

  buffering for datagrams, at either the sending or receiving

  host(s).  It does guarantee, however, that a SendVLNDatagram

  operation invoked by a VLN client will eventually complete; this

  implies that datagrams may be lost if buffering is insufficient

                                 18

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  and receiving clients are too slow.  The VLN layer will do its

  best to discard packets for this reason very infrequently.

  2.3  Reliability Guarantees

       Guarantees are never absolute--there is always some

  probability, however remote, that a catastrophe will occur and a

  promise be broken.  Nevertheless, the concept of a guarantee is

  still valuable, because the improbability of a catastrophic

  failure influences the design and cost of the recovery mechanisms

  needed to overcome it.  In this spirit, the word "guarantee" as

  used here implies only that the alternatives to correct function

  (i.e., catastrophic failures) are extremely rare events.

       The VLN does not attempt to guarantee reliable delivery of

  datagrams, nor does it provide negative acknowlegements of

  damaged or discarded datagrams.  It does guarantee that received

  datagrams are accurate representations of transmitted datagrams.

       The VLN also guarantees that datagrams will not "replicate"

  during transmission, i.e., for each intended receiver, a given

                                 19

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  datagram is received once or not at all.  (5)

       Between two VLN clients S and R in the same cluster, the

  sequence of datagrams received by R is a subsequence of the

  sequence sent by S to R, i.e., datagrams are received in order,

  possibly with omissions.

       A stronger sequencing property holds for broadcast and

  multicast transmissions.  If receivers R1 and R2 both receive

  broadcast or multicast datagrams D1 and D2, either they both

  receive D1 before D2, or they both receive D2 before D1.

  3  Desirable Characteristics of a Physical Local Network

       While it is conceivable that a VLN could be implemented on a

  long-haul or virtual-circuit-oriented PLN, these networks are

  generally ill-suited to the task.  The ARPANET, for example, does

  not support broadcast or multicast addressing modes, nor does it
  _______________
  (5) A protocol operating above the  VLN  layer  (e.g.,  TCP)  may
  employ  a  retransmission strategy; the VLN layer does nothing to
  filter duplicates arising in this way.

                                 20

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  provide the VLN sequencing guarantees.  If the ARPANET were the

  base for a VLN implementation, broadcast and multicast would have

  to be constructed from specific addressing, and a network-wide

  synchronization mechanism would be required to implement the

  sequencing guarantees.  Although the compatibility and

  substitutability benefits might still be achieved, the

  implementation would be costly, and performance poor.

       A good implementation base for a Cronus VLN would be a

  high-bandwidth local network with all or most of these

  characteristics:

    1.  The ability to encapsulate a VLN datagram in a single PLN
        datagram.

    2.  An efficient broadcast addressing mode.

    3.  Natural resistance to datagram replication during
        transmission.

    4.  Sequencing guarantees like those of the VLN interface.

    5.  A strong error-detecting code (datagram checksum).

  Good candidates include Ethernet, the Flexible Intraconnect, and

  Pronet, among others.

                                 21

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  4  A VLN Implementation Based on Ethernet

       The Ethernet local network specification is the result of a

  collaborative effort by Digital Equipment Corp., Intel Corp., and

  Xerox Corp.  The Version 1.0 specification [3] was released in

  September, 1980. Useful background information on the Ethernet

  internetworking model is supplied in [2].

       The Ethernet VLN implementation begins with the assumption,

  in accordance with the model developed in [2], that the addresses

  of specific Ethernet hosts are arbitrary, 48 bit quantities, not

  under the control of DOS Design/Implementation Project.  The VLN

  implementation must, therefore, develop a strategy to map VLN

  addresses to specific Ethernet addresses.

       A second important assumption is that the VLN-address-to-

  Ethernet-address mapping should not be maintained manually in

  each VLN host.  Manual procedures are too cumbersome and error-

  prone when a local network may consist of hundreds of hosts, and

  hosts may join and leave the network frequently.  A protocol is

  described below which allows hosts to dynamically construct the

  mapping, beginning only with knowledge of their own VLN and

                                 22

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  Ethernet host addresses.

       The succeeding sections discuss the VLN implementation based

  on the Ethernet PLN in detail, as designed for the Cronus

  prototype currently being assembled by Bolt Beranek and Newman,

  Inc.

  4.1  Datagram Encapsulation

       An internet datagram is encapsulated in an Ethernet frame by

  placing the internet datagram in the Ethernet frame data field,

  and setting the Ethernet type field to "DoD IP".

       To guarantee agreement by the sending and receiving VLN

  components on the ordering of internet datagram octets within an

  encapsulating Ethernet frame, the Ethernet octet ordering is

  required to be consistent with the IP octet ordering.

  Specifically, if IP(i) and IP(j) are internet datagram octets and

  i<j, and EF(k) and EF(l) are the Ethernet frame octets which

  represent IP(i) and IP(j) once encapsulated, then k<l.  Bit

                                 23

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  orderings within octets must also be consistent. (6)

  4.2  VLN Specific Addressing Mode

       Each VLN component maintains a virtual-to-physical address

  map (the VPMap) which translates a 32 bit specific VLN host

  address (7) in this cluster to a 48 bit Ethernet address.  (8)

  The VPMap data structure and the operations on it can be

  efficiently implemented using standard hashing techniques.  Only

  three operations defined on the VPMap are discussed in this note:

  ClearVPMap, TranslateVtoP, and StoreVPPair.

       Each host has an Ethernet host address (EHA) to which its

  controller will respond, determined by Xerox and the controller

  manufacturer (see Section 4.5.2).  At host initialization time,
  _______________
  (6) See [1] for a lively discussion of the problems arising  from
  the failure of communicants to agree upon consistent orderings.
  (7) Since the high-order 22 bits of the address are constant  for
  all  specific  host addresses in a cluster, only the low-order 10
  bits of the address are significant.
  (8) The least significant bit of the first octet of the  Ethernet
  address  is  always 0, since these are not broadcast or multicast
  addresses.

                                 24

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

   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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                     Destination Address                       |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  | Destination Address (contd.)  |        Source Address         |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                   Source Address (contd.)                     |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |      Type  ("DoD IP")         |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                                  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                  |Version|  IHL  |Type of Service|
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |        Total Length           |        Identification         |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |Flags|     Fragment Offset     |  Time to Live |    Protocol   |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |       Header Checksum         |         Source Address        |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |    Source Address (contd.)    |      Destination Address      |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  | Destination Address (contd.)  |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                                  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                  |                               |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               +
  .                                                               .
  .                            Data                               .
  .                                                               .
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                     Frame Check Sequence                      |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

             Table 3. An Encapsulated Internet Datagram

                                 25

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  the local VLN component establishes a second host address, the

  multicast host address (MHA), constructed from the host's VLN

  address.  Represented as a sequence of octets in hexadecimal, the

  MHA has the form:

           A  B  C  D  E  F

          09-00-08-00-hh-hh

  A is the first octet transmitted, and F the last.  The two octets

  E and F contain the host local address:

              E         F

          000000hh  hhhhhhhh
                ^          ^
               MSB        LSB

       When the VLN client invokes SendVLNDatagram to send a

  specifically addressed datagram, the local VLN component

  encapsulates the datagram in an Ethernet frame and transmits it

  without delay.  The Source Address in the Ethernet frame is the

  EHA of the sending host.  The Ethernet Destination Address is

  formed from the destination VLN address in the datagram, and is

  either:

                                 26

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

      - the EHA of the destination host, if the TranslateVtoP
        operation on the VPMap succeeds,

    or

      - the MHA formed from the host number in the destination VLN
        address, as described above.

       When a VLN component receives an Ethernet frame with type

  "DoD IP", it decapsulates the internet datagram and delivers it

  to its client.  If the frame was addressed to the EHA of the

  receiving host, no further action is taken, but if the frame was

  addressed to the MHA of the receiving host the VLN component will

  broadcast an update for the VPMaps of the other hosts.  This will

  permit the other hosts to use the EHA of this host for future

  traffic.  The type field of the Ethernet frame containing the

  update is "Cronus VLN", and the format of the data octets in the

  frame is:

   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
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Subtype ("Mapping Update")  |        Host VLN Address       |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |   Host VLN Address (contd.)   |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

  When a local VLN component receives an Ethernet frame with type

                                 27

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  "Cronus VLN" and subtype "Mapping Update", it performs a

  StoreVPPair operation using the Ethernet Source Address field and

  the host VLN address sent as frame data.

       This multicast mechanism could be extended to perform other

  address mapping functions, for example, to discover the addresses

  of a cluster's gateways.  Suppose all gateways register the same

  Multicast Gateway Address (MGA, analogous to MHA) with their

  Ethernet controllers; the MGA then becomes a "logical name" for

  the gateway function in a Cronus cluster.  If a host needs to

  send a datagram out of the cluster and doesn't know what specific

  gateway address to use, the host can multicast the datagram to

  all gateways by sending to MGA.  One or more of the gateways can

  forward the datagram, and transmit a "Gateway Mapping Update"

  (containing the gateway's specific Ethernet address) back to the

  originating host.  Specific gateway addresses could be cached in

  a structure similar to the VPMap, keyed to the destination

  network number. (9)

  _______________
  (9) Because the Cronus Advanced Development  Model  will  contain
  only  one  gateway,  a  simpler  mechanism  will  be  implemented
  initially; the specific Ethernet address of the gateway  will  be
  "well-known" to all VLN components.

                                 28

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

       The approach just outlined suggests that all knowledge of

  the existence and connectivity of gateways would be isolated in

  the VLN layer of cluster hosts.  Other mechanisms, e.g., based on

  the ICMP component of the Internet Protocol, could be used

  instead to disseminate information about gateways to cluster

  hosts (see [7]).  These would require, however, specific Ethernet

  addresses to be visible above the VLN layer, a situation the

  current design avoids.

  4.3  VLN Broadcast and Multicast Addressing Modes

       A VLN datagram will be transmitted in broadcast mode if the

  argument to SendVLNDatagram specifies the VLN broadcast address

  (local address = 65,535, decimal) as the destination.  Broadcast

  is implemented in the most straightforward way:  the VLN datagram

  is encapsulated in an Ethernet frame with type "DoD IP", and the

  frame destination address is set to the Ethernet broadcast

  address.  The receiving VLN component merely decapsulates and

  delivers the VLN datagram.

                                 29

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

       The implementation of the VLN multicast addressing mode is

  more complex, for several reasons.  Typically, each VLN host will

  define a constant called Max_Attended, equal to the maximum

  number of VLN multicast addresses which can be simultaneously

  "attended" by this host.  Max_Attended should not be a function

  of the particular Ethernet controller(s) the host may be using,

  but only of the software resources (buffer space and processor

  time) that the host dedicates to VLN multicast processing.  The

  protocol below permits a host to attend any number of VLN

  multicast addresses, from 0 to 64,511 (the entire VLN multicast

  address space), independent of the controller in use.

       Understanding of the VLN multicast protocol requires some

  knowledge of the behavior of existing Ethernet controllers.  The

  Ethernet specification does not specify whether a controller must

  perform multicast address recognition, or if it does, how many

  multicast addresses it must be prepared to recognize.  As a

  result Ethernet controller designs vary widely in their behavior.

  For example, the 3COM Model 3C400 controller follows the first

  pattern and performs no multicast address recognition, instead

  passing all multicast frames to the host for further processing.

                                 30

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  The Intel Model iSBC 550 controller permits the host to register

  a maximum of 8 multicast addresses with the controller, and the

  Interlan Model NM10 controller permits a maximum of 63 registered

  addresses.

       It would be possible to implement the VLN multicast mode

  using only the Ethernet broadcast mechanism.  This would imply,

  however, that every VLN host would receive and process every VLN

  multicast, often only to discard the datagram because it is

  misaddressed.  More efficient operation is possible if at least

  some Ethernet multicast addresses are used, since Ethernet

  controllers with multicast recognition can discard misaddressed

  frames more rapidly than their hosts, reducing both the processor

  time and buffer space demands upon the host.

       The protocol specified below satisfies the design

  constraints and is especially simple.

       A VLN-wide constant, Min_Attendable, is equal to the

  smallest number of Ethernet multicast addresses that can be

  simultaneously attended by any host in the VLN, or 64,511,

  whichever is smaller.  A network composed of hosts with the Intel

                                 31

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  and Interlan controllers mentioned above, for example, would have

  Min_Attendable equal to 7; (10) a network composed only of hosts

  with 3COM Model 3C400 controllers would have Min_Attendable equal

  to 64,511, since the controller itself does not restrict the

  number of Ethernet multicast addresses to which a host may

  attend.  (11)

       The local address field of a VLN multicast address can be

  represented in two octets, in hexadecimal:

         mm-mm

  From Table 1, mm-mm considered as a decimal integer M is in the

  range 1,024 to 65,534.  When SendVLNDatagram is invoked with a

  VLN multicast datagram, there are two cases:

    1.  (M - 1,023) <= Min_Attendable.  In this case, the datagram
        is encapsulated in a "DoD IP" Ethernet frame, and multicast
        with the Ethernet address

                09-00-08-00-mm-mm

        A VLN component which attends VLN multicast addresses in
  _______________
  (10) Min_Attendable is 7, rather than 8,  because  one  multicast
  slot  in  the  controller must be reserved for the host's MHA, as
  described in Section 4.2.
  (11) For the Cronus Advanced Development Model, Min_Attendable is
  currently defined to be 60.

                                 32

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

        this range should receive Ethernet multicast addresses in
        this format, if necessary by registering the addresses with
        its Ethernet controller.

    2.  (M - 1,023) > Min_Attendable.  The datagram is encapsulated
        in a "DoD IP" Ethernet frame, and transmitted to the
        Ethernet broadcast address.  A VLN component which attends
        VLN multicast addresses in this range must receive all
        broadcast frames, and filter them on the basis of frame
        type and VLN destination address (found in the IP
        destination address field).

       There are two drawbacks to this protocol that might induce a

  more complex design:  1) because Min_Attendable is the "lowest

  common denominator" for the ability of Ethernet controllers to

  recognize multicast addresses, some controller capabilities may

  be wasted; 2) small VLN addresses (less than Max_Attendable +

  1,024) will probably be handled more efficiently than large VLN

  multicast addresses.  The second factor complicates the

  assignment of VLN multicast addresses to functions, since the

  particular assignment affects multicast performance.

                                 33

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  4.4  Reliability Guarantees

       Delivered datagrams are accurate copies of transmitted

  datagrams because VLN components do not deliver incoming

  datagrams with invalid Frame Check Sequences.  The 32 bit CRC

  error detecting code applied to Ethernet frames is very powerful,

  and the probability of an undetected error occuring "on the wire"

  is very small.  The probability of an error being introduced

  before the checksum is computed or after it is checked is

  comparable to the probability of an error in a disk subsystem

  before a write operation or after a read; often, but not always,

  it can be ignored.

       Datagram duplication does not occur because the VLN layer

  does not perform datagram retransmissions, the primary source of

  duplicates in other networks.  Ethernet controllers do perform

  retransmission as a result of "collisions" on the channel, but

  the "collision enforcement" or "jam" assures that no controller

  receives a valid frame if a collision occurs.

       The sequencing guarantees hold because mutually exclusive

  access to the transmission medium defines a total ordering on

                                 34

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  Ethernet transmissions, and because a VLN component buffers all

  datagrams in FIFO order, if it buffers more than one datagram.

  4.5  Use of Assigned Numbers

       On a philosophical note, protocols such as IP and TCP exist

  to provide communication services to extensible sets of clients;

  new clients and usages continue to emerge over the life of a

  protocol.  Because a protocol implementation must have some

  unambiguous knowledge of the "names" of the clients, sockets,

  hosts, networks, etc., with which it interacts, a need arises for

  the continuing administration of the 'assigned numbers' related

  to the protocol.  Typically the organization which declares a

  protocol to be a standard also becomes the administrator for its

  assigned numbers.  The organization will designate an office to

  assign numbers to the clients, sockets, hosts, networks, etc.,

  that emerge over time.  The office will also prepare lists of

  number assignments that are distributed to protocol users; the

  reference [4] is a list of this kind.

                                 35

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

       There are three organizations responsible for number

  assignment related to the Ethernet-based VLN implementation:

  DARPA, Xerox, and the DOS Design/Implementation Project; their

  respective roles are described below.

  4.5.1  DARPA

       DARPA administers the internet network number and internet

  protocol number assignments.  The Ethernet-based VLN

  implementation does not involve DARPA assigned numbers, but any

  particular 'instance' of a Cronus VLN is expected to have a class

  A or B internet network number assigned by DARPA.  For example,

  the prototype Cronus system (the Advanced Development Model)

  being constructed at Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc., has class B

  network number 128.011.xxx.xxx.

       Protocols built above the VLN will make use of other DARPA

  assigned numbers, e.g., the Cronus object-operation protocol

  requires an internet protocol number.

                                 36

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  4.5.2  The Xerox Ethernet Address Administration Office

       The Ethernet Address Administration Office at Xerox Corp.

  administers Ethernet specific and multicast address assignments,

  and Ethernet frame type assignments.

       It is the intent of the Xerox internetworking model that

  every Ethernet host have a distinct specific address, and that

  the address space be large enough to accomodate a very large

  population of inexpensive hosts (e.g., personal workstations).

  They have therefore chosen to delegate the authority to assign

  specific addresses to the manufacturers of Ethernet controllers,

  by granting them large blocks of addresses on request.

  Manufacturers are expected to assign specific addresses from

  these blocks densely, e.g., sequentially, one per controller, and

  to consume all of them before requesting another block.

       The preceding paragraph explains the Xerox address

  assignment policy not because the DOS Design/Implementation

  Project intends to manufacture Ethernet controllers (!), but

  because Xerox has chosen to couple the assignment of specific and

  multicast Ethernet addresses.  An assigned block is defined by a

                                 37

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

  23-bit constant, which specifies the contents of the first three

  octets of an Ethernet address, except for the broadcast/multicast

  bit (the least significant bit of the first octet).  The

  possessor of an assigned block thus has in hand 2**24 specific

  addresses and 2**24 multicast addresses, to parcel out as

  necessary.

       The block assigned for use in the Cronus system is defined

  by the octets 08-00-08 (hex).  The specific addresses in this

  block range from 08-00-08-00-00-00 to 08-00-08-FF-FF-FF (hex),

  and the multicast addresses range from 09-00-08-00-00-00 to 09-

  00-08-FF-FF-FF (hex).  Only a fraction of the multicast addresses

  are actually utilized, as explained in Sections 4.2 and 4.3.

       The Ethernet Address Administration Office has designated a

  public frame type, "DoD IP", 08-00 (hex), to be used for

  encapsulated internet protocol datagrams.  The Ethernet VLN

  implementation uses this frame type exclusively for datagram

  encapsulation. In addition, the Cronus system uses two private

  Ethernet frame types, assigned by the Ethernet Address

  Administration Office:

                                 38

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

          NAME             TYPE

          Cronus VLN       80-03
          Cronus Direct    80-04

  (The use of the "Cronus Direct" frame type is not described in

  this note.)

       The same Ethernet address and frame type assignments will be

  used by every instance of a Cronus VLN; no further assignments

  from the Ethernet Address Administration Office are anticipated.

  4.5.3  The DOS Design/Implementation Project

       The DOS Design/Implementation Project assumes responsibility

  for the assignment of subtypes of the Ethernet frame type "Cronus

  VLN".  No assignments of subtypes for purposes unrelated to the

  Cronus system design are expected, nor are assignments to other

  organizations.  The subtypes currently assigned are:

                                 39

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

          NAME                 SUBTYPE

          Mapping Update       00-01

                                 40

  DOS-26 Rev A                                Virtual Local Network
  RFC 824

                             REFERENCES

  [1]
      "On holy wars and a plea for peace," Danny Cohen, Computer,
      V 14 N 10, October 1981, pp. 48-54.

  [2]
      "48-bit absolute internet and Ethernet host numbers," Yogen
      K. Dalal and Robert S. Printis, Proc. of the 7th Data
      Communications Symposium, October 1981.

  [3]
      "The Ethernet:  a local area network, data link layer and
      physical layer specifications," Digital Equipment Corp., Intel
      Corp., and Xerox Corp., Version 1.0, September 1980.

  [4]
      "Assigned numbers," Jon Postel, RFC 790, USC/Information
      Sciences Institute, September 1981.

  [5]
      "Internet Protocol - DARPA internet program protocol
      specification," Jon Postel, ed., RFC 791, USC/Information
      Sciences Institute, September 1981.

  [6]
      "Internet protocol transition workbook," Network Information
      Center, SRI International, Menlo Park, California, March 1982.

  [7]
      "IP - Local Area Network Addressing Issues," Robert Gurwitz
      and Robert Hinden, Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., (draft)
      August 1982.

                                 41