Справочник по сетевым протоколам

     Служба клининга еще здесь. | бесплатные советники с центовыми счетами. |     

sent to inform the peer

sent to inform the peer that the implementation can receive

compressed Address and Control fields.

If a compressed frame is received when Address-and-Control-Field-

Compression has not been negotiated, the implementation MAY

silently discard the frame.

The Address and Control fields MUST NOT be compressed when sending

any LCP packet. This rule guarantees unambiguous recognition of

LCP packets.

When the Address and Control fields are compressed, the Data Link

Layer FCS field is calculated on the compressed frame, not the

original uncompressed frame.

A summary of the Address-and-Control-Field-Compression configuration

option format is shown below. The fields are transmitted from left

to right.

0 1

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5


| Type | Length |






Simpson [Page 50]

RFC 1661 Point-to-Point Protocol July 1994

Security Considerations

Security issues are briefly discussed in sections concerning the

Authentication Phase, the Close event, and the Authentication-

Protocol Configuration Option.


[1] Perkins, D., "Requirements for an Internet Standard Point-to-

Point Protocol", RFC 1547, Carnegie Mellon University,

December 1993.

[2] Reynolds, J., and Postel, J., "Assigned Numbers", STD 2, RFC

1340, USC/Information Sciences Institute, July 1992.


This document is the product of the Point-to-Point Protocol Working

Group of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Comments should

be submitted to the ietf-ppp@merit.edu mailing list.

Much of the text in this document is taken from the working group

requirements [1]; and RFCs 1171 & 1172, by Drew Perkins while at

Carnegie Mellon University, and by Russ Hobby of the University of

California at Davis.

William Simpson was principally responsible for introducing

consistent terminology and philosophy, and the re-design of the phase

and negotiation state machines.

Содержание  Назад  Вперед