Browse Prior Art Database

PPP LCP Internationalization Configuration Option (RFC2484)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000003064D
Original Publication Date: 1999-Jan-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-13
Document File: 4 page(s) / 8K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

G. Zorn: AUTHOR

Abstract

The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) [1] provides a standard method for transporting multi-protocol datagrams over point-to-point links. PPP also defines an extensible Link Control Protocol (LCP), which allows negotiation of an Authentication Protocol for authenticating its peer before allowing Network Layer protocols to transmit over the link.

This text was extracted from a ASCII Text document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 39% of the total text.

Network Working Group G. Zorn

Request for Comments: 2484 Microsoft Corporation

Category: Standards Track January 1999

Updates: 2284, 1994, 1570

PPP LCP Internationalization Configuration Option

Status of this Memo

This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the

Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for

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

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

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

Copyright Notice

Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.

1. Abstract

The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) [1] provides a standard method for

transporting multi-protocol datagrams over point-to-point links. PPP

also defines an extensible Link Control Protocol (LCP), which allows

negotiation of an Authentication Protocol for authenticating its peer

before allowing Network Layer protocols to transmit over the link.

Both LCP and Authentication Protocol packets may contain text which

is intended to be human-readable [2,3,4]. This document defines an

LCP configuration option for the negotiation of character set and

language usage, as required by RFC 2277 [5].

2. Specification of Requirements

In this document, the key words "MAY", "MUST, "MUST NOT", "optional",

"recommended", "SHOULD", and "SHOULD NOT" are to be interpreted as

described in [6].

3. Additional LCP Configuration Option

The Configuration Option format and basic options are already defined

for LCP [1].

Up-to-date values of the LCP Option Type field are specified in STD 2

[7]. This document concerns the following value:

28 Internationalization

The Internationalization option described here MAY be negotiated

independently in each direction.

Only one instance of this option SHOULD be sent by an implementation,

representing its preferred language and charset.

If Internationalization option is rejected by the peer, the default

language and charset MUST be used to construct all human-readable

messages sent to the peer.

4.1. Internationalization

Description

This Configuration Option provides a method for an implementation

to indicate to the peer both the language in which human-readable

messages it sends should be composed and the charset in which that

language should be represented.

A summary of the Internationalization option format is shown below.

The fields are transmitted from left to right.

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

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

| Type | Length | MIBenum

+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

MIBenum (cont) ...