Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments (RFC1561)
Original Publication Date: 1993-Dec-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2019-Feb-13
Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)
This memo specifies a profile of the ISO/IEC 8473 Connectionless-mode Network Layer Protocol for use in conjunction with RFC 1347, TCP/UDP over Bigger Addresses. It describes the use of CLNP to provide the lower-level service expected by Transmission Control Protocol and User Datagram Protocol. This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any kind.
Network Working Group D. Piscitello Request for Comments: 1561 Core Competence Category: Experimental December 1993
Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments
Status of this Memo
This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet community. This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
This memo specifies a profile of the ISO/IEC 8473 Connectionless-mode Network Layer Protocol (CLNP, ) for use in conjunction with RFC 1347, TCP/UDP over Bigger Addresses (TUBA, ). It describes the use of CLNP to provide the lower-level service expected by Transmission Control Protocol (TCP, ) and User Datagram Protocol (UDP, ). CLNP provides essentially the same datagram service as Internet Protocol (IP, ), but offers a means of conveying bigger network addresses (with additional structure, to aid routing).
While the protocols offer nearly the same services, IP and CLNP are not identical. This document describes a means of preserving the semantics of IP information that is absent from CLNP while preserving consistency between the use of CLNP in Internet and OSI environments. This maximizes the use of already-deployed CLNP implementations.
Many thanks to Ross Callon (Wellfleet Communications), John Curran (BBN), Cyndi Jung (3Com), Paul Brooks (UNSW), Brian Carpenter (CERN), Keith Sklower (Cal Berkeley), Dino Farinacci and Dave Katz (Cisco Systems), Rich Colella (NIST/CSL) and David Oran (DEC) for their assistance in composing this text.
Piscitello [Page 1]
RFC 1561 CLNP in TUBA Environments December 1993
The following language conventions are used in the items of specification in this document:
* MUST, SHALL, or MANDATORY -- the item is an absolute requirement of the specification.
* SHOULD or RECOMMENDED -- the item should generally be followed for all but exceptional circumstances.
* MAY or OPTIONAL -- the item is truly optional and may be followed or ignored according to the needs of the implementor.
To the extent possible, this document is written in the language of the Internet. For example, packet is used rather than "protocol data unit", and "fragment" is used rather than "segment". There are some terms that carry over from OSI; these are, for the most part, used so that cross-reference between this document and RFC 994  or ISO/IEC 8473 is not entirely painful. OSI acronyms are for the most part avoided.
The goal of this specification is to allow compatible and interoperable implementations to encapsulate TCP and UDP packets in CLNP data units. In a sense, it is more of a "hosts requirements" document for the network layer of TUBA implementations than a protocol specification. It is assumed that readers are familiar with STD 5, RFC 791, STD 5, RFC 792 , STD 3, RFC 1122 , and, to a lesser extent, RFC 994 and ISO/IEC 8473. This document is compatible wi...