Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-atm-mtu
draft-ietf-atm-mtu
HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2002 00:55:49 GMT
Server: Apache/1.3.20 (Unix)
Last-Modified: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 23:00:00 GMT
ETag: "2e6d5c-314f-2d600270"
Accept-Ranges: bytes
Content-Length: 12623
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/plain
Network Working Group Randall J. Atkinson
Internet Draft Naval Research Laboratory
<draft-ietf-atm-mtu-07.txt> 14 February 1994
Default IP MTU for use over ATM AAL5
Status of this Memo
Internet Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its Areas, and its Working Groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet
Drafts. This particular draft is a working document of the IETF's
"IP over ATM" working group. It is intended to eventually submit
this draft to the IESG for possible release as a standards-track RFC.
Internet Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months. This Internet Draft expires on 14 July 1994. Internet
Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at
any time. It is not appropriate to use Internet Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as a "working draft" or "work in
progress".
Please check the I-D abstract listing contained in each Internet
Draft directory to learn the current status of this or any other
Internet Draft.
Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Default Value for IP MTU over ATM AAL5
Protocols in wide use throughout the Internet, such as the Network
File System (NFS), currently use large frame sizes (e.g. 8 KB).
Empirical evidence with various applications over the Transmission
Control Protocol (TCP) indicates that larger Maximum Transmission
Unit (MTU) sizes for the Internet Protocol (IP) tend to give better
performance. Fragmentation of IP datagrams is known to be highly
undesirable. [KM87] It is desirable to reduce fragmentation in the
network and thereby enhance performance by having the IP Maximum
Transmission Unit (MTU) for AAL5 be reasonably large. NFS defaults
to an 8192 byte frame size. Allowing for RPC/XDR, UDP, IP, and LLC
headers, NFS would prefer a default MTU of at least 8300 octets.
Routers can sometimes perform better with larger packet sizes because
most of the performance costs in routers relate to "packets handled"
rather than "bytes transferred". So there are a number of good
reasons to have a reasonably large default MTU value for IP over ATM
AAL5.
RFC 1209 specifies the IP MTU over SMDS to be 9180 octets, which is
Atkinson [Page 1]
Internet Draft 14 February 1994
larger than 8300 octets but still in the same range. [RFC-1209] There
is no good reason for the default MTU of IP over ATM AAL5 to be
different from IP over SMDS, given that they will be the same
magnitude. Having the two be the same size will be helpful in
interoperability and will also help reduce incidence of IP
fragmentation.
Therefore, the default IP MTU for use with ATM AAL5 shall be 9180
octets. All implementations compliant and conformant with this
specification shall support at least the default IP MTU value for use
over ATM AAL5.
Permanent Virtual Circuits
Implementations which only support Permanent Virtual Circuits
(PVCs) will (by definition) not implement any ATM signalling
protocol. Such implementations shall use the default IP MTU value of
9180 octets unless both parties have agreed in advance to use some
other IP MTU value via some mechanism not specified here.
Switched Virtual Circuits
Implementations that support Switched Virtual Circuits (SVCs) MUST
attempt to negotiate the AAL CPCS-SDU size using the ATM signalling
protocol. The industry standard ATM signalling protocol uses two
different parts of the Information Element named "AAL Parameters" to
exchange information on the MTU over the ATM circuit being setup
[ATMF93a]. The Forward Maximum CPCS-SDU Size field contains the
value over the path from the calling party to the called party. The
Backwards Maximum CPCS-SDU Size Identifier field contains the value
over the path from the called party to the calling party. The ATM
Forum specifies the valid values of this identifier as 1 to 65535
inclusive. Note that the ATM Forum's User-to-Network-Interface (UNI)
signalling permits the MTU in one direction to be different from the
MTU in the opposite direction, so the Forward Maximum CPCS-SDU Size
Identifier might have a different value from the Backwards Maximum
CPCS-SDU Size Identifier on the same connection.
If the calling party wishes to use the default MTU it shall still
include the "AAL Parameters" information element with the default
values for the Maximum CPCS-SDU Size as part of the SETUP message of
the ATM signalling protocol [ATMF93b]. If the calling party desires
to use a different value than the default, it shall include the "AAL
Parameters" information element with the desired value for the
Atkinson [Page 2]
Internet Draft 14 February 1994
Maximum CPCS-SDU Size as part of the SETUP message of the ATM
Signalling Protocol. The called party will respond using the same
information elements and identifiers in its CONNECT message response
[ATMF93c].
If the called party receives a SETUP message containing the
"Maximum CPCS-SDU Size" in the AAL Parameters information element, it
shall handle the Forward and Backward Maximum CPCS-SDU Size
Identifier as follows:
a) If it is able to accept the ATM MTU values proposed by the
SETUP message, it shall include an AAL Parameters information
element in its response. The Forward and Backwards Maximum
CPCS-SDU Size fields shall be present and their values shall be
equal to the corresponding values in the SETUP message.
b) If it wishes a smaller ATM MTU size than that proposed, then
it shall set the values of the Maximum CPCS-SDU Size in the AAL
Parameters information elements equal to the desired value in the
CONNECT message responding to the original SETUP message.
c) If the calling endpoint receives a CONNECT message that does
not contain the AAL Parameters Information Element, but the
corresponding SETUP message did contain the AAL Parameters
Information Telement (including the forward and backward CPCS-SDU
Size fields), it shall clear the call with cause "AAL Parameters
cannot be supported".
d) If either endpoint receives a STATUS message with cause
"Information Element Non-existent or Not Implemented" or cause
""Access Information Discarded", and with a diagnostic field
indicating the AAL Parameters Information Element identifier, it
shall clear the call with cause "AAL Parameters cannot be
supported."
e) If either endpoint receives CPCS-SDUs in excess of the
negotiated MTU size, it may use IP fragmentation or may clear the
call with cause "AAL Parameters cannot be supported". In this
case, an error has occurred either due to a fault in an end
system or in the ATM network. The error should be noted by ATM
network management for human examination and intervention.
If the called endpoint incorrectly includes the Forward and
Backward Maximum CPCS-SDU Size fields in the CONNECT messages (e.g.
because the original SETUP message did not include these fields) or
Atkinson [Page 3]
Internet Draft 14 February 1994
it sets these fields to an invalid value, then the calling party
shall clear the call with cause "Invalid Information Element
Contents".
Path MTU Discovery Required
The Path MTU Discovery mechanism is an Internet Standard [RFC-1191]
and is an important mechanism for reducing IP fragmentation in the
Internet. This mechanism is particularly important because new
subnet ATM uses a default MTU sizes significantly different from
older subnet technologies such as Ethernet and FDDI.
In order to ensure good performance throughout the Internet and
also to permit IP to take full advantage of the potentially larger IP
datagram sizes supported by ATM, all routers implementations that
comply or conform with this specification must also implement the IP
Path MTU Discovery mechanism as defined in RFC-1191 and clarified by
RFC-1435. Host implementations should implement the IP Path MTU
Discovery mechanism as defined in RFC-1191.
Applicability Statement
The Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM AAL5 defined in RFC-1483
is not specific to any model of IP and ATM interaction. [RFC-1483]
Similarly, this specification is general enough to apply to all
models for use of IP over ATM AAL5. Use of this specification is
recommended for all implementatons of IP over ATM AAL5 in order to
increase interoperability and performance. This specification does
not conflict with the Classical IP over ATM specification and may be
used as a conforming extension to that specification. [RFC-1577]
Applicability of this draft is not limited to the Classical IP over
ATM model.
Security Considerations
Security Considerations are not discussed in this memo.
Atkinson [Page 4]
Internet Draft 14 February 1994
References
[RFC-791] J. Postel, Internet Protocol, RFC-791, DDN Network
Information Center, September 1981.
[RFC-793] J. Postel, Transmission Control Protocol, RFC-793, DDN
Network Information Center, September 1981.
[RFC-1122] R. Braden (Ed.), Requirements for Internet Hosts --
Communications Layers, RFC-1122, DDN Network Information Center,
October 1989, pp.58-60.
[RFC-1191] J. Mogul & S. Deering, Path MTU Discovery, RFC-1191, DDN
Network Information Center, November 1990.
[RFC-1209] D. Piscitello, D & J. Lawrence, The Transmission of IP
Datagrams over the SMDS Service, RFC-1209, DDN Network Information
Center, March 1991.
[RFC-1435] S. Knowles, IESG Advice from Experience with Path MTU
Discovery, RFC-1435, DDN Network Information Center, March 1993.
[RFC-1483] J. Heinanen, Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Adapatation
Layer 5, RFC-1483, DDN Network Information Center, 20 July 1993.
[RFC-1577] M. Laubach, Classical IP and ARP over ATM, RFC-1577,
DDN Network Information Center, January 1994.
[ATMF93a] R. Breault, J. Grace, J. Jaeger, & L. Wojnaroski(eds.), ATM
Forum User Network Interface Specification, Version 3.0,
Section 5.4.5.5, p. 194-200, 10 September 1993, ATM Forum.
[ATMF93b] R. Breault, J. Grace, J. Jaeger, & L. Wojnaroski(eds.), ATM
Forum User Network Interface Specification, Version 3.0,
Section 5.3.1.7, p. 171-172, 10 September 1993, ATM Forum.
[ATMF93c] R. Breault, J. Grace, J. Jaeger, & L. Wojnaroski(eds.), ATM
Forum User Network Interface Specification, Version 3.0,
Section 5.3.1.3, p. 168, 10 September 1993, ATM Forum.
[KM87] C. Kent & J.Mogul, "Fragmentation Considered Harmful", Proceedings
of the ACM SIGCOMM '87 Workshop on Frontiers in Computer Communications
Technology, August 1987.
Atkinson [Page 5]
Internet Draft 14 February 1994
Acknowledgements
While all members of the IETF's IP over ATM Working Group have been
helpful, Vern Schryver, Rob Warnock, Craig Partridge, Subbu
Subramaniam, and Bryan Lyles have been especially helpful to the
author in analysing the host and routing implications of the default
IP MTU value. Similarly, Dan Grossman provided significant review and
help in ensuring alignment of this text with the related work in the
ATM Forum and ITU.
Disclaimer
Author's organisation provided for identification purposes only.
This document presents the author's views and is not necessarily the
official opinion of his employer.
Author Information
Randall J. Atkinson <atkinson@itd.nrl.navy.mil>
Information Technology Division
Naval Research Laboratory
Washington, DC 20375-5320
USA
Atkinson [Page 6]
