Browse Prior Art Database

Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay (RFC1294)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000002114D
Original Publication Date: 1992-Jan-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-12
Document File: 21 page(s) / 51K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

T. Bradley: AUTHOR [+3]

Abstract

This memo describes an encapsulation method for carrying network interconnect traffic over a Frame Relay backbone. It covers aspects of both Bridging and Routing. Systems with the ability to transfer both this encapsulation method, and others must have a priori knowledge of which virtual circuits will carry which encapsulation method and this encapsulation must only be used over virtual circuits that have been explicitly configured for its use.

This text was extracted from a ASCII document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 5% of the total text.

Network Working Group T. Bradley

Request for Comments: 1294 C. Brown

Wellfleet Communications, Inc.

A. Malis

BBN Communications

January 1992

Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay

1. Status of this Memo

This RFC specifies an IAB standards track protocol for the Internet

community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.

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

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

Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

2. Abstract

This memo describes an encapsulation method for carrying network

interconnect traffic over a Frame Relay backbone. It covers aspects

of both Bridging and Routing. Systems with the ability to transfer

both this encapsulation method, and others must have a priori

knowledge of which virtual circuits will carry which encapsulation

method and this encapsulation must only be used over virtual circuits

that have been explicitly configured for its use.

3. Acknowledgements

Comments and contributions from many sources, especially those from

Ray Samora of Proteon, Ken Rehbehn of Netrix Corporation, Fred Baker

and Charles Carvalho of Advanced Computer Communications and Mostafa

Sherif of AT&T have been incorporated into this document. Special

thanks to Dory Leifer of University of Michigan for his contributions

to the resolution of fragmentation issues. This document could not

have been completed without the expertise of the IP over Large Public

Data Networks working group of the IETF.

4. Conventions

The following language conventions are used in the items of

specification in this document:

o Must, Shall or Mandatory -- the item is an absolute

requirement of the specification.

o Should or Recommended -- the item should generally be

followed for all but exceptional circumstances.

o May or Optional -- the item is truly optional and may be

followed or ignored according to the needs of the

implementor.

5. Introduction

The following discussion applies to those devices which serve as end

stations (DTEs) on a public or private Frame Relay network (for

example, provided by a common carrier or PTT). It will not discuss

the behavior of those stations that are considered a part of the

Frame Relay network (DC...