1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
|
Network Working Group J. Onions
Request for Comments: 1086 Nottingham
M. Rose
TWG
December 1988
ISO-TP0 bridge between TCP and X.25
Status of this Memo
This memo proposes a standard for the Internet community. Hosts on
the Internet that choose to implement ISO TP0 transport connectivity
between TCP and X.25 based hosts are expected to experiment with this
proposal. TCP port 146 is reserved for this proposal. Distribution
of this memo is unlimited and comments are highly encouraged.
Introduction
This memo specifies a protocol that is used to bridge ISO TP0 packets
between X.25 and TCP networks. This technique is useful when
interconnecting a DDN IP internet to an X.25 subnetwork. This is not
a "magic bullet" solution to the DDN/ISO interoperability problem.
Rather, if one is running higher-layer ISO protocols in both networks
(namely ISO TP0), then a TP0 bridge can be used to achieve
connectivity.
The protocol itself is fairly simple as the method of operation for
running TP0 over the TCP and X.25 protocols have previously been
defined. A bridge offering ISO-TP0 gateway services simply applies
both methods as appropriate. The protocol works by TP0/TCP hosts
"registering" an X.25 subaddress (and corresponding TCP port/IP
address) with the bridge. TP0/X.25 hosts use the standard method for
establishing, maintaining, and releasing connections. When a
connection is established, the bridge establishes the corresponding
TCP connection and simply shuffles TP0 packets between the two. When
a TP0/TCP host initiates a connection, it establishes a TCP
connection to the bridge using port number 146 and communicates the
desired X.25 address. The bridge establishes a connection to the
native X.25 host and simply shuffles TP0 packets between the two.
1. Introduction and Motivation
The migratory protocol described in [RFC1006] makes possible the
transmission of TP0 packets between hosts on TCP/IP internets. With
the addition of a small protocol converter, a TCP/IP host can be made
to appear in the X.25 addressing space and be able to accept and make
Onions & Rose [Page 1]
RFC 1086 ISO-TP0 bridge between TCP and X.25 December 1988
connections using the TP0 protocol.
This procedure is particularly useful in the following cases:
1. A host on an IP based internet can communicate with hosts on
X.25 based networks providing the hosts are running ISO protocols.
This also assumes a friendly gateway willing to run the actual TP0
bridge and make available to the IP host part of its X.25 address
space.
2. A site having sparse connections to an X.25 network and using
a TCP/IP based local area network for local communications. In
this case all hosts on the LAN can have access to hosts on the
X.25 network running ISO TP0.
Pictorially, this memo describes interoperation in the following
environment:
+---------------------------------+
| |
| +-----------------------------------+
| +----+ | +----+ | +----+ |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | +-----------|-----+ +--------------+ | |
| | | TP0 | | | | TP0 | | |
| +----+ | +----+ | +----+ |
| TCP Host | Bridge Host| X.25 Host |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
+-------------------|-------------+ |
TCP/IP Network | |
| |
+-----------------------------------+
X.25 Network
2. Definitions and Philosophy
Some modest terminology and philosophy is introduced to aid
readability and stir interest.
The ISO Transport Service (TS) provides a reliable, packet-stream to
its users [ISO8072]. The ISO Transport Protocol (TP) implements this
service [ISO8073]. There are five classes of this protocol. The
class is selected on the basis of the services offered by the
underlying network service. Transport class 0 (TP0) is used when the
network service offered is connection-oriented and error-detecting.
Onions & Rose [Page 2]
RFC 1086 ISO-TP0 bridge between TCP and X.25 December 1988
As should be expected, TP0 is a rather simple protocol, since the
underlying network service actually provides most of the qualities
offered by the transport service.
CCITT Recommendation X.25 [ISO8208,X.25] offers such a network
service. It is beyond the scope of this memo to describe X.25 in any
detail, but two observations are pertinent: First, X.25 is offered
as a wide-area network service by many commercial and (non-U.S.)
government carriers. Second, the TP0/X.25 combination is very
popular in Europe and other communities with a strong PTT-oriented
market.
It has been argued that the DoD Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)
[MIL1778, RFC793] can also be seen as providing a connection-oriented
and error-detecting network service. This remark is controversial in
the sense that the TCP is actually an end-to-end transport protocol
and not a network protocol; the DoD Internet Protocol (IP) [MIL1777,
RFC791] is the network protocol in the DoD Protocol Suite. However,
one of the advantages of layering is that, when properly architected,
it enhances flexibility. This notion led to the development of
[RFC983] and its successor [RFC1006], which described how to provide
the ISO transport service on top of TCP/IP internetworks.
3. The Model
The model is simple. The method for transmitting TP0 packets using
TCP is defined in [RFC1006]. The method for transmitting TP0 packets
using X.25 is defined in [ISO8878]. The TP0 bridge merely has to
convert between the two forms. As with most protocols, there are
three well-defined phases of interaction: connection establishment,
data transfer, and connection release. The method of operation for
the data transfer and connection release phases are quite similar
when using TP0 over either network service. Hence the resulting
protocol mapping functions are quite simple.
The difficult part is in managing connection establishment. A small
"registration" protocol is used to aid the protocol mapping function
for the connection establishment phase. The protocol performs one of
two operations: an X.25 address is specified for an outgoing call, or
an X.25 address is specified to accept incoming calls.
This memo ignores the problems of authentication and authorization.
These areas are presumed to be a local matter. It is worth pointing
out that running such a TP0 bridge with unrestricted access allows
any TCP/IP host to lay claim to part of the TP0 bridge host's X.25
address space. This address space is limited and will not support
many foreign hosts registering listening addresses.
Onions & Rose [Page 3]
RFC 1086 ISO-TP0 bridge between TCP and X.25 December 1988
The protocol makes no attempt to report errors other than those
transmitted by the TP0 protocol. To attempt such additions would
require other mechanism such as a new protocol layer or equivalent.
The chosen model is kept as simple as possible with network errors
being ignored if recoverable, and resulting in disconnection
otherwise. This actually enhances the transparency of the gateway,
in that the only gateway specific functions are collected together in
the connection phase. The resultant circuit, once established, is
indistinguishable from an [RFC1006] implementation.
4. The Protocol
The protocol is quite simple. A successful connection establishment
phase results in two network connections being established. TP0 is
used over each network connection, though one network connection is
provided by X.25 and the other by the TCP.
During the data transfer phase, the TP0 bridge reads TPDUs (transport
protocol data units) from one network connection and writes them to
the other network connection. During the connection release phase,
when one network indicates a disconnect, the bridge disconnects the
other network connection; or in the case of simultaneous network
disconnects, no action is taken by the bridge.
As expected, the method of operation for the connection establishment
phase is more complex. Connection establishment is driven by a
registration procedure which is initiated by a TCP/IP host initiating
a connection with the TP0 bridge. This procedure takes on one of two
"flavors" depending on whether the initiating host wishes to
establish a connection to a particular X.25 address or listen for
connections on a particular X.25 address.
The initiating host initiates the registration procedure by
establishing a connection to TCP port 146 on the TP0 bridge. It then
sends one octet which indicates the flavor the registration procedure
will take:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| function |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Onions & Rose [Page 4]
RFC 1086 ISO-TP0 bridge between TCP and X.25 December 1988
The value of this octet is a binary-encoded value:
value meaning
----- -------
0 illegal
1 connect to a particular X.25 host
2 listen for incoming X.25 connections
3-255 reserved
The method of operation for the registration procedure now diverges,
based on the function chosen.
FUNCTION 1: CONNECTION THROUGH THE TP0 BRIDGE
The X.25 address to call is now sent by the initiating host to the
TP0 bridge. The format of an X.25 address is described in Section
5 of this memo.
The TP0 bridge now attempts to call the specified address. If
this succeeds, the connection establishment phase has succeeded
and the data transfer phase is begun. If the call fails, then the
TP0 bridge closes the TCP connection.
FUNCTION 2: ESTABLISHING A LISTENING ADDRESS
The X.25 address, which should be a subaddress of the TP0 bridge's
X.25 address, on which to listen for incoming X.25 connections is
now sent by the initiating host to the TP0 bridge.
Next, the initiating host sends an IP address and TCP port number
which will service incoming calls for the indicated X.25 address.
The format of a TCP/IP address is described in Section 6 of this
memo.
The TP0 bridge now listens, on behalf of the initiating host, on
the indicated X.25 address.
If an incoming call is received, a TCP connection is established
to the corresponding TCP/IP address. If this connection is
successful, then the connection establishment phase has succeeded
and the data transfer phase is begun. If the connection fails,
the incoming call is refused.
The TCP/IP connection between the initiating host and the TP0
bridge is a "heartbeat" connection for the registration function.
If this connection closes, the TP0 bridge assumes hat the
listening function has been terminated by the initiating host, and
consequently, the TP0 bridge no longer listens for incoming calls
Onions & Rose [Page 5]
RFC 1086 ISO-TP0 bridge between TCP and X.25 December 1988
on the indicated X.25 address. If such a facility were not
present, then the indicated X.25 address could not be recovered
for reuse.
5. Format of X.25 Addresses
A standardized octet-encoding of X.25 addresses is used by the
protocol described in this memo. The encoding has a fixed-length of
68 octets and contains 10 fields:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| address type | X.121 address ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
| ... | ... | X.121 length | Protocol ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... | ... | ... | PID length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Call User Data field | ... | ... |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| CUDF length | X.25 Facilities ... | ... |
| ... | ... | ... |Facility Length|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The fields are:
address type (2 octets) - a binary-encoded value in network order
indicating the address type. The value 3 is used for X.25 addressing
of this format.
X.121 address (16 octets) - the ascii-encoded value of the X.121
address.
address length (1 octet) - a binary-encoded value in network order
indicating how many octets of the X.121 address are meaningful.
Protocol ID (4 octets) - meaningful at the remote system.
Protocol ID length (1 octet) - a binary-encoded value indicating the
number of protocol ID octets are meaningful.
Onions & Rose [Page 6]
RFC 1086 ISO-TP0 bridge between TCP and X.25 December 1988
User Data (16 octets) - meaningful at the remote system.
User Data Length (1 octet) - a binary-encoded value indicating the
number of User Data octets are meaningful.
X.25 Facilities (6 octets) - meaningful at the remote system.
X.25 Facilities length (1 octet) - a binary-encoded value indicating
the number of Facility octets are meaningful.
6. Format of TCP/IP Addresses
A standardized octet-encoding of TCP/IP addresses is used by the
protocol described in this memo. The encoding has a fixed-length of
16 octets and contains 4 fields:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| address type | TCP port |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IP address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| reserved | ... | ... | ... |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The fields are:
address type (2 octets) - a binary-encoded value in network order.
The value 2 is used.
TCP port (2 octets) - a binary-encoded value in network order.
IP address (4 octets) - a binary-encoded value in network order.
reserved (16 octets) - null-value padding.
Comments
At present, the structure of the X.25 address and the internet
address are rather ad-hoc and specific to the UNIX operating system.
These structures may change in the future as experience is gained in
the use of the TP0 bridge.
Onions & Rose [Page 7]
RFC 1086 ISO-TP0 bridge between TCP and X.25 December 1988
References
[ISO8072] Information processing systems -- Open systems
interconnection, "Transport Service Definition",
International Standard, June, 1985.
[ISO8073] Information processing systems -- Open systems
interconnection, "Transport Protocol Specification",
International Standard, July, 1986.
[ISO8208] Information processing systems, "X.25 package level
protocol for data terminal equipment", Draft
International Standard, July, 1985.
[ISO8878] Information processing systems -- Data communications,
Use of X.25 to provide the OSI connection-mode network
service", Draft International Standard, January, 1987.
[MIL1777] Military Standard 1777, "Internet Protocol".
[MIL1778] Military Standard 1778, "Transmission Control Protocol".
[RFC791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol - DARPA Internet Program
Protocol Specification", RFC 791, USC/ISI,
September 1981.
[RFC793] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol - DARPA
Internet Program Protocol Specification", RFC 793,
USC/ISI, September 1981.
[RFC983] Cass, D., and M. Rose, "ISO Transport Services on Top
of the TCP", RFC 983, NTRC, April 1986.
[RFC1006] Rose, M., and D. Cass, "ISO Transport Service on Top
of the TCP Version: 3", NTRC, May 1987.
[X.25] CCITT Recommendation X.25, "Interface Between Data
Terminal Equipment (DTE) and Data Circuit Terminating
Equipment (DCE) for Terminals Operating in the Packet
Mode on Public Data Networks," International Telegraph
and Telephone Consultative Committee Yellow book, Vol.
VIII.2, Geneva, 1981.
Onions & Rose [Page 8]
RFC 1086 ISO-TP0 bridge between TCP and X.25 December 1988
Authors' Addresses:
Julian P. Onions
Computer Science Department
Nottingham University
University Park
Nottingham, NG7 2RD
United Kingdom
EMail: JPO@CS.NOTT.AC.UK
Marshall Rose
The Wollongong Group
1129 San Antonio Road
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Phone: (415) 962-7100
EMail: mrose@TWG.COM
Onions & Rose [Page 9]
|
