One document matched: draft-ietf-pppext-pppoe-mtu-1500-00.txt
Internet Draft John Fitzgibbon
draft-ietf-pppext-pppoe-mtu-1500-00.txt
January 2005
Expires: July 2005
Accommodating an MTU of 1500 in PPPoE
IPR Statement
By submitting this Internet-Draft, I certify that any applicable
patent or other IPR claims of which I am aware have been disclosed,
or will be disclosed, and any of which I become aware will be
disclosed, in accordance with RFC 3668.
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions
of Section 10 of RFC2026.
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.
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 inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
Point-to-Point Protocol Over Ethernet, (PPPoE), as described in RFC
2516, mandates a maximum negotiated MRU of 1492. This memo proposes
relaxing that restriction to allow a maximum negotiated MRU of 1500.
This can be achieved by treating the PPPoE Header and Protocol ID as
part of the Ethernet Header, taking advantage of the fact that most
network devices have buffers for the Ethernet Header and Payload that
are at least 1522 octets in size. To aid backward compatability, the
proposal recommends testing the link with MRU-sized Echo-Request
packets if an MRU greater than 1492 has been assumed or negotiated.
1. Description
As PPPoE [1] is increasingly becoming the protocol of choice for
provisioning residential and small business Internet service, this is
having the undesirable effect of reducing the effective MTU for large
segments of Internet users from 1500 octets to 1492 octets.
The reduced MTU can cause problems for any equipment or software that
is configured with a static MTU, in particular if the expected or
default value is 1500. In addition, widespread adoption of a lower
MTU reduces the overall efficiency of the Internet.
The reduction in MTU was deemed necessary because a PPPoE header
requires 8 octets, and the maximum payload size of an Ethernet frame
is 1500 octets.
However, many devices support variable length Ethernet headers,
without compromising the 1500 octet MTU of the Ethernet Frame's
payload. For example, any device that supports double-tagged VLANs,
(802.1Q-in-Q), will already allow for at least 8 octets of additional
data in the Ethernet header to accommodate the two VLAN tags.
Therefore, it is suggested to replace Section 7, Paragraph 2 of RFC
2516, which reads as follows:
"The Maximum-Receive-Unit (MRU) option MUST NOT be negotiated to a
larger size than 1492. Since Ethernet has a maximum payload size of
1500 octets, the PPPoE header is 6 octets and the PPP Protocol ID is
2 octets, the PPP MTU MUST NOT be greater than 1492."
with the following:
"The Maximum-Receive-Unit (MRU) option MUST NOT be negotiated to a
larger size than 1500.
Since Ethernet has a maximum payload size of 1500 octets, and the
PPPoE Header plus Protocol ID is 8 octets, an MRU greater than 1492
can only be accommodated if the negotiating devices, and any
intermediate devices, are capable of treating the PPPoE Header plus
Protocol ID as if they were part of the Ethernet Header. In other
words, they must have sufficient overhead in their Ethernet Header
representations to accommodate the extra 8 octets.
Devices that are not capable of handling the extra 8 octets in their
Ethernet Header SHOULD negotiate an MRU no larger than 1492. If no
MRU has been specified by the receiving side, the sending side MAY
assume that the receiving side is capable of handling the PPP default
MRU of 1500. To ensure compatability with older equipment, if the
sending side is assigning an MRU greater than 1492 to the receiving
side, (either by default, or through negotiation), it is RECOMMENDED
that the sending side send one or more MRU-sized Echo-Request packets
once the session is opened, to test that the receiving side and any
intermediate equipment can handle the MRU. If no Echo-Replies are
received, the sending side MAY choose to repeat the test with
Echo-Request packets of size 1492. If these packets receive replies,
the sending side MAY choose to treat the receiver as if it had
explicitly specified an MRU of 1492.
If the LCP includes any 802.1Q VLAN tags, a device SHOULD negotiate
an MRU no larger than 1492."
2. Security Considerations
Older devices which assume that the maximum size for an Ethernet
header plus its payload is less than 1522 octets might suffer buffer
overflow conditions if they encounter larger frames. These devices
should be retired, as most modern network devices are capable of
generating larger Ethernet frames, which leaves the older devices
vulnerable to attack regardless of whether PPPoE is used as the
attack vector.
3. References
[1] Mamakos L., Lidl K., Evarts J., Carrel D., Simone D., Wheeler
R., "A Method for Transmitting PPP Over Ethernet (PPPoE)", RFC
2516, February 1999
4. Author's Address
John Fitzgibbon
468 Duboce Ave,
San Francisco CA 94117
Phone: 415-558-9851
EMail: fitz@jfitz.com
5. Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights."
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-22 19:21:09 |