One document matched: draft-ietf-pppext-padding-ds-00.txt


Network Working Group                                         W. Simpson
Internet Draft                                                DayDreamer
expires in six months                                          July 1997


                    PPP LCP Self Describing Padding
                  draft-ietf-pppext-padding-ds-00.txt


Status of this Memo

   Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

   This document is an Internet-Draft.  Internet Drafts are working doc-
   uments of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its Areas, and
   its Working Groups.  Note that other groups may also distribute work-
   ing documents as Internet Drafts.

   Internet Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
   months, and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
   at any time.  It is not appropriate to use Internet Drafts as refer-
   ence material, or to cite them other than as a ``working draft'' or
   ``work in progress.''

   To learn the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the
   ``1id-abstracts.txt'' listing contained in the internet-drafts Shadow
   Directories on:

      ftp.is.co.za (Africa)
      nic.nordu.net (Europe)
      ds.internic.net (US East Coast)
      ftp.isi.edu (US West Coast)
      munnari.oz.au (Pacific Rim)


Abstract

   The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) [1] provides a standard method for
   transporting multi-protocol datagrams over point-to-point links.  PPP
   defines an extensible Link Control Protocol (LCP) for establishing,
   configuring, and testing the data-link connection.  This document
   defines the Self-Describing-Padding option.









Simpson                   expires in six months                 [Page i]
DRAFT                          PPP SDP                         July 1997


1.  Introduction

   Each octet of padding contains the index of that octet.  The first
   pad octet contains the value one (1).  The final pad octet indicates
   the number of pad octets to remove.  For example, three pad octets
   would contain the values 1, 2, and 3.

   On receipt, when any of the pad octets contain an incorrect index
   value, the entire frame SHOULD be silently discarded.

   Rationale:

      The first octet value of one (1) indicates the PPP Padding Proto-
      col to the LCP Compound-Frames option (specified elsewhere).

      After removing the PPP FCS, the remaining final octet will indi-
      cate the correct number of octets to remove.  Together with check-
      ing the pad values, this is intended to prevent confusion when
      used with the LCP FCS-Alternatives option (specified elsewhere).


2.  Additional LCP Configuration Options

   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 the
   most recent "Assigned Numbers" [2].  This document concerns the fol-
   lowing values:

      10      Self-Describing-Padding

   In this document, the key words "MAY", "MUST", "MUST NOT",
   "required", and "SHOULD", are to be interpreted as described in [3].


2.1.  Self-Describing-Padding

   Description

      This Configuration Option provides a method for an implementation
      to indicate to the peer that it understands self-describing pads
      when padding is added at the end of the PPP Information field.

      This option is most likely to be used when some protocols, such as
      network-layer or compression protocols, are configured that
      require detection and removal of any trailing padding.  Such spe-
      cial protocols are identified in their respective documents.



Simpson                   expires in six months                 [Page 1]
DRAFT                          PPP SDP                         July 1997


      Nota Bene:

         This does not mean that Self-Describing-Padding is mentioned in
         the protocol documents.  A length dependency requiring detec-
         tion and removal of trailing padding is specified in such pro-
         tocol documents.  It is the responsibility of each protocol to
         distinguish padding octets from real information [1 page 5].

         By design, the receiver need not check padding for those proto-
         cols that do not need the padding removed.

      If the option is Configure-Reject'd, the peer MUST NOT add any
      padding to any identified special protocols, but MAY add padding
      to other protocols.

      If the option is Ack'd, the peer MUST follow the procedures for
      adding self-describing pads, but only to the specifically identi-
      fied protocols.  The peer is not required to add any padding to
      other protocols.

      Rationale:

         This is defined so that the Configure-Reject handles either
         case where the peer does not generate self-describing pads.
         When the peer never generates padding, it may safely Configure-
         Reject the option.  When the peer does not understand the
         option, it also will not successfully configure a special pro-
         tocol which requires elimination of padding.

         Some senders might only be capable of either adding padding to
         every protocol or not adding padding to any protocol.  Any
         implementation that generates padding, and has a protocol con-
         figured which requires the padding to be detected, SHOULD
         include this Option in its Configure-Request, and SHOULD Con-
         figure-Nak with this Option when it is not present in the
         peer's Configure-Request.

      The Maximum-Pad-Value (MPV) is also negotiated.  Only the values
      one (1) through MPV are used for padding.

      When no padding would otherwise be required, but the final octet
      of the PPP Information field contains the value 1 through MPV, at
      least one self-describing pad octet MUST be added to the frame.
      If the final octet is zero (0), or is greater than MPV, no addi-
      tional padding is required.






Simpson                   expires in six months                 [Page 2]
DRAFT                          PPP SDP                         July 1997


      Rationale:

         Since this option is intended to support compression protocols,
         the Maximum-Pad-Value is specified to limit the likelihood that
         a frame might actually become longer.

   A summary of the Self-Describing-Padding Configuration Option format
   is shown below.  The fields are transmitted from left to right.

    0                   1                   2
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     Type      |    Length     |    Maximum    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type

      10

   Length

      3

   Maximum

      This field specifies the largest number of padding octets that may
      be added to the frame.  The value may range from 0 to 255.

      The value 0 indicates that Self-Defining-Padding is understood,
      but no padding is expected.  A peer that needs to send padding
      SHOULD Configure-Nak with an appropriate value.

      Values of 2, 4, or 8 are most likely.


Security Considerations

   When used with encryption protocols, checking the pad values provides
   a simple integrity facility, and avoids a possible covert channel.
   This small amount of known plaintext does not create any problems for
   modern ciphers.










Simpson                   expires in six months                 [Page 3]
DRAFT                          PPP SDP                         July 1997


Acknowledgements

   Self-Describing-Padding was suggested and named by Fred Baker.

   Special thanks to Ascend Communications for providing computing
   resources and network access support for writing this specification.


References

   [1]   Simpson, W., Editor, "The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)",
         STD-51, RFC-1661, December 1993.

   [2]   Reynolds, J.K., Postel, J.B., "Assigned Numbers", RFC-1700,
         July 1992.

   [3]   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
         Levels", BCP 14, Harvard University, March 1997.

































Simpson                   expires in six months                 [Page 4]
DRAFT                          PPP SDP                         July 1997


Contacts

   Comments about this document should be discussed on the
   ietf-ppp@merit.edu mailing list.

   This document is a submission to the Point-to-Point Protocol Working
   Group of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).  The working
   group can be contacted via the current chair:

      Karl Fox
      Ascend Communications
      3518 Riverside Drive  Suite 101
      Columbus, Ohio  43221

          karl@MorningStar.com
          karl@Ascend.com

   Questions about this document can also be directed to:

      William Allen Simpson
      DayDreamer
      Computer Systems Consulting Services
      1384 Fontaine
      Madison Heights, Michigan  48071

          wsimpson@UMich.edu
          wsimpson@GreenDragon.com (preferred)
          bsimpson@MorningStar.com























Simpson                   expires in six months                 [Page 5]




PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-22 14:42:04