RFC 3232 – Assigned Numbers: RFC 1700 is Replaced by an On-line Database
Network Working Group J. Reynolds, Editor Request for Comments: 3232 RFC Editor Obsoletes: 1700 January 2002 Category: Informational
Assigned Numbers: RFC 1700 is Replaced by an On-line Database
Status of this Memo This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. Abstract This memo obsoletes RFC 1700 (STD 2) "Assigned Numbers", which contained an October 1994 snapshot of assigned Internet protocol parameters. Description From November 1977 through October 1994, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) periodically published tables of the Internet protocol parameter assignments in RFCs entitled, "Assigned Numbers". The most current of these Assigned Numbers RFCs had Standard status and carried the designation: STD 2. At this time, the latest STD 2 is RFC 1700. Since 1994, this sequence of RFCs have been replaced by an online database accessible through a web page (currently, www.iana.org). The purpose of the present RFC is to note this fact and to officially obsolete RFC 1700, whose status changes to Historic. RFC 1700 is obsolete, and its values are incomplete and in some cases may be wrong. We expect this series to be revived in the future by the new IANA organization. Security Considerations This memo does not affect the technical security of the Internet. Reynolds Informational [Page 1]
RFC 3232 RFC 1700 Replaced by On-line Database January 2002 Author's Address Joyce K. Reynolds RFC Editor 4676 Admiralty Way Marina del Rey, CA 90292 USA EMail: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
RFC 2464 – Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks
Network Working Group M. Crawford
Request for Comments: 2464 Fermilab
Obsoletes: 1972 December 1998
Category: Standards Track
Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks
Status of this Memo
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.
1. Introduction
This document specifies the frame format for transmission of IPv6
packets and the method of forming IPv6 link-local addresses and
statelessly autoconfigured addresses on Ethernet networks. It also
specifies the content of the Source/Target Link-layer Address option
used in Router Solicitation, Router Advertisement, Neighbor
Solicitation, Neighbor Advertisement and Redirect messages when those
messages are transmitted on an Ethernet.
This document replaces RFC 1972, "A Method for the Transmission of
IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks", which will become historic.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC 2119].
2. Maximum Transmission Unit
The default MTU size for IPv6 [IPV6] packets on an Ethernet is 1500
octets. This size may be reduced by a Router Advertisement [DISC]
containing an MTU option which specifies a smaller MTU, or by manual
configuration of each node. If a Router Advertisement received on an
Ethernet interface has an MTU option specifying an MTU larger than
1500, or larger than a manually configured value, that MTU option may
be logged to system management but must be otherwise ignored.
For purposes of this document, information received from DHCP is
considered "manually configured" and the term Ethernet includes
CSMA/CD and full-duplex subnetworks based on ISO/IEC 8802-3, with
various data rates.
3. Frame Format
IPv6 packets are transmitted in standard Ethernet frames. The
Ethernet header contains the Destination and Source Ethernet
addresses and the Ethernet type code, which must contain the value
86DD hexadecimal. The data field contains the IPv6 header followed
immediately by the payload, and possibly padding octets to meet the
minimum frame size for the Ethernet link.
0 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Destination |
+- -+
| Ethernet |
+- -+
| Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source |
+- -+
| Ethernet |
+- -+
| Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv6 |
+- -+
| header |
+- -+
| and |
+- -+
/ payload ... /
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
(Each tic mark represents one bit.)
4. Stateless Autoconfiguration
The Interface Identifier [AARCH] for an Ethernet interface is based
on the EUI-64 identifier [EUI64] derived from the interface's built-
in 48-bit IEEE 802 address. The EUI-64 is formed as follows.
(Canonical bit order is assumed throughout.)
The OUI of the Ethernet address (the first three octets) becomes the
company_id of the EUI-64 (the first three octets). The fourth and
fifth octets of the EUI are set to the fixed value FFFE hexadecimal.
The last three octets of the Ethernet address become the last three
octets of the EUI-64.
The Interface Identifier is then formed from the EUI-64 by
complementing the "Universal/Local" (U/L) bit, which is the next-to-
lowest order bit of the first octet of the EUI-64. Complementing
this bit will generally change a 0 value to a 1, since an interface's
built-in address is expected to be from a universally administered
address space and hence have a globally unique value. A universally
administered IEEE 802 address or an EUI-64 is signified by a 0 in the
U/L bit position, while a globally unique IPv6 Interface Identifier
is signified by a 1 in the corresponding position. For further
discussion on this point, see [AARCH].
For example, the Interface Identifier for an Ethernet interface whose
built-in address is, in hexadecimal,
34-56-78-9A-BC-DE
would be
36-56-78-FF-FE-9A-BC-DE.
A different MAC address set manually or by software should not be
used to derive the Interface Identifier. If such a MAC address must
be used, its global uniqueness property should be reflected in the
value of the U/L bit.
An IPv6 address prefix used for stateless autoconfiguration [ACONF]
of an Ethernet interface must have a length of 64 bits.
5. Link-Local Addresses
The IPv6 link-local address [AARCH] for an Ethernet interface is
formed by appending the Interface Identifier, as defined above, to
the prefix FE80::/64.
10 bits 54 bits 64 bits
+----------+-----------------------+----------------------------+
|1111111010| (zeros) | Interface Identifier |
+----------+-----------------------+----------------------------+
6. Address Mapping -- Unicast
The procedure for mapping IPv6 unicast addresses into Ethernet link-
layer addresses is described in [DISC]. The Source/Target Link-layer
Address option has the following form when the link layer is
Ethernet.
0 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+- Ethernet -+
| |
+- Address -+
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Option fields:
Type 1 for Source Link-layer address.
2 for Target Link-layer address.
Length 1 (in units of 8 octets).
Ethernet Address
The 48 bit Ethernet IEEE 802 address, in canonical bit
order. This is the address the interface currently
responds to, and may be different from the built-in
address used to derive the Interface Identifier.
7. Address Mapping -- Multicast
An IPv6 packet with a multicast destination address DST, consisting
of the sixteen octets DST[1] through DST[16], is transmitted to the
Ethernet multicast address whose first two octets are the value 3333
hexadecimal and whose last four octets are the last four octets of
DST.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1|0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| DST[13] | DST[14] |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| DST[15] | DST[16] |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
8. Differences From RFC 1972
The following are the functional differences between this
specification and RFC 1972.
The Address Token, which was a node's 48-bit MAC address, is
replaced with the Interface Identifier, which is 64 bits in
length and based on the EUI-64 format [EUI64]. An IEEE-defined
mapping exists from 48-bit MAC addresses to EUI-64 form.
A prefix used for stateless autoconfiguration must now be 64 bits
long rather than 80. The link-local prefix is also shortened to
64 bits.
9. Security Considerations
The method of derivation of Interface Identifiers from MAC addresses
is intended to preserve global uniqueness when possible. However,
there is no protection from duplication through accident or forgery.
10. References
[AARCH] Hinden, R. and S. Deering "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 2373, July 1998.
[ACONF] Thomson, S. and T. Narten, "IPv6 Stateless Address
Autoconfiguration", RFC 2462, December 1998.
[DISC] Narten, T., Nordmark, E. and W. Simpson, "Neighbor Discovery
for IP Version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 2461, December 1998.
[EUI64] "Guidelines For 64-bit Global Identifier (EUI-64)",
http://standards.ieee.org/db/oui/tutorials/EUI64.html
[IPV6] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.
[RFC 2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
11. Author's Address
Matt Crawford
Fermilab MS 368
PO Box 500
Batavia, IL 60510
USA
Phone: +1 630 840-3461
EMail: crawdad@fnal.gov
12. Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1998). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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.
RFC 792 – Internet Control Message Protocol
Network Working Group J. Postel
Request for Comments: 792 ISI
September 1981
Updates: RFCs 777, 760
Updates: IENs 109, 128
INTERNET CONTROL MESSAGE PROTOCOL
DARPA INTERNET PROGRAM
PROTOCOL SPECIFICATION
Introduction
The Internet Protocol (IP) [1] is used for host-to-host datagram
service in a system of interconnected networks called the
Catenet [2]. The network connecting devices are called Gateways.
These gateways communicate between themselves for control purposes
via a Gateway to Gateway Protocol (GGP) [3,4]. Occasionally a
gateway or destination host will communicate with a source host, for
example, to report an error in datagram processing. For such
purposes this protocol, the Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP),
is used. ICMP, uses the basic support of IP as if it were a higher
level protocol, however, ICMP is actually an integral part of IP, and
must be implemented by every IP module.
ICMP messages are sent in several situations: for example, when a
datagram cannot reach its destination, when the gateway does not have
the buffering capacity to forward a datagram, and when the gateway
can direct the host to send traffic on a shorter route.
The Internet Protocol is not designed to be absolutely reliable. The
purpose of these control messages is to provide feedback about
problems in the communication environment, not to make IP reliable.
There are still no guarantees that a datagram will be delivered or a
control message will be returned. Some datagrams may still be
undelivered without any report of their loss. The higher level
protocols that use IP must implement their own reliability procedures
if reliable communication is required.
The ICMP messages typically report errors in the processing of
datagrams. To avoid the infinite regress of messages about messages
etc., no ICMP messages are sent about ICMP messages. Also ICMP
messages are only sent about errors in handling fragment zero of
fragemented datagrams. (Fragment zero has the fragment offeset equal
zero).
[Page 1]
September 1981
RFC 792
Message Formats
ICMP messages are sent using the basic IP header. The first octet of
the data portion of the datagram is a ICMP type field; the value of
this field determines the format of the remaining data. Any field
labeled "unused" is reserved for later extensions and must be zero
when sent, but receivers should not use these fields (except to
include them in the checksum). Unless otherwise noted under the
individual format descriptions, the values of the internet header
fields are as follows:
Version
4
IHL
Internet header length in 32-bit words.
Type of Service
0
Total Length
Length of internet header and data in octets.
Identification, Flags, Fragment Offset
Used in fragmentation, see [1].
Time to Live
Time to live in seconds; as this field is decremented at each
machine in which the datagram is processed, the value in this
field should be at least as great as the number of gateways which
this datagram will traverse.
Protocol
ICMP = 1
Header Checksum
The 16 bit one's complement of the one's complement sum of all 16
bit words in the header. For computing the checksum, the checksum
field should be zero. This checksum may be replaced in the
future.
[Page 2]
September 1981
RFC 792
Source Address
The address of the gateway or host that composes the ICMP message.
Unless otherwise noted, this can be any of a gateway's addresses.
Destination Address
The address of the gateway or host to which the message should be
sent.
[Page 3]
September 1981
RFC 792
Destination Unreachable Message
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| unused |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Internet Header + 64 bits of Original Data Datagram |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IP Fields:
Destination Address
The source network and address from the original datagram's data.
ICMP Fields:
Type
3
Code
0 = net unreachable;
1 = host unreachable;
2 = protocol unreachable;
3 = port unreachable;
4 = fragmentation needed and DF set;
5 = source route failed.
Checksum
The checksum is the 16-bit ones's complement of the one's
complement sum of the ICMP message starting with the ICMP Type.
For computing the checksum , the checksum field should be zero.
This checksum may be replaced in the future.
Internet Header + 64 bits of Data Datagram
The internet header plus the first 64 bits of the original
[Page 4]
September 1981
RFC 792
datagram's data. This data is used by the host to match the
message to the appropriate process. If a higher level protocol
uses port numbers, they are assumed to be in the first 64 data
bits of the original datagram's data.
Description
If, according to the information in the gateway's routing tables,
the network specified in the internet destination field of a
datagram is unreachable, e.g., the distance to the network is
infinity, the gateway may send a destination unreachable message
to the internet source host of the datagram. In addition, in some
networks, the gateway may be able to determine if the internet
destination host is unreachable. Gateways in these networks may
send destination unreachable messages to the source host when the
destination host is unreachable.
If, in the destination host, the IP module cannot deliver the
datagram because the indicated protocol module or process port is
not active, the destination host may send a destination
unreachable message to the source host.
Another case is when a datagram must be fragmented to be forwarded
by a gateway yet the Don't Fragment flag is on. In this case the
gateway must discard the datagram and may return a destination
unreachable message.
Codes 0, 1, 4, and 5 may be received from a gateway. Codes 2 and
3 may be received from a host.
[Page 5]
September 1981
RFC 792
Time Exceeded Message
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| unused |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Internet Header + 64 bits of Original Data Datagram |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IP Fields:
Destination Address
The source network and address from the original datagram's data.
ICMP Fields:
Type
11
Code
0 = time to live exceeded in transit;
1 = fragment reassembly time exceeded.
Checksum
The checksum is the 16-bit ones's complement of the one's
complement sum of the ICMP message starting with the ICMP Type.
For computing the checksum , the checksum field should be zero.
This checksum may be replaced in the future.
Internet Header + 64 bits of Data Datagram
The internet header plus the first 64 bits of the original
datagram's data. This data is used by the host to match the
message to the appropriate process. If a higher level protocol
uses port numbers, they are assumed to be in the first 64 data
bits of the original datagram's data.
Description
If the gateway processing a datagram finds the time to live field
[Page 6]
September 1981
RFC 792
is zero it must discard the datagram. The gateway may also notify
the source host via the time exceeded message.
If a host reassembling a fragmented datagram cannot complete the
reassembly due to missing fragments within its time limit it
discards the datagram, and it may send a time exceeded message.
If fragment zero is not available then no time exceeded need be
sent at all.
Code 0 may be received from a gateway. Code 1 may be received
from a host.
[Page 7]
September 1981
RFC 792
Parameter Problem Message
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Pointer | unused |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Internet Header + 64 bits of Original Data Datagram |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IP Fields:
Destination Address
The source network and address from the original datagram's data.
ICMP Fields:
Type
12
Code
0 = pointer indicates the error.
Checksum
The checksum is the 16-bit ones's complement of the one's
complement sum of the ICMP message starting with the ICMP Type.
For computing the checksum , the checksum field should be zero.
This checksum may be replaced in the future.
Pointer
If code = 0, identifies the octet where an error was detected.
Internet Header + 64 bits of Data Datagram
The internet header plus the first 64 bits of the original
datagram's data. This data is used by the host to match the
message to the appropriate process. If a higher level protocol
uses port numbers, they are assumed to be in the first 64 data
bits of the original datagram's data.
[Page 8]
September 1981
RFC 792
Description
If the gateway or host processing a datagram finds a problem with
the header parameters such that it cannot complete processing the
datagram it must discard the datagram. One potential source of
such a problem is with incorrect arguments in an option. The
gateway or host may also notify the source host via the parameter
problem message. This message is only sent if the error caused
the datagram to be discarded.
The pointer identifies the octet of the original datagram's header
where the error was detected (it may be in the middle of an
option). For example, 1 indicates something is wrong with the
Type of Service, and (if there are options present) 20 indicates
something is wrong with the type code of the first option.
Code 0 may be received from a gateway or a host.
[Page 9]
September 1981
RFC 792
Source Quench Message
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| unused |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Internet Header + 64 bits of Original Data Datagram |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IP Fields:
Destination Address
The source network and address of the original datagram's data.
ICMP Fields:
Type
4
Code
0
Checksum
The checksum is the 16-bit ones's complement of the one's
complement sum of the ICMP message starting with the ICMP Type.
For computing the checksum , the checksum field should be zero.
This checksum may be replaced in the future.
Internet Header + 64 bits of Data Datagram
The internet header plus the first 64 bits of the original
datagram's data. This data is used by the host to match the
message to the appropriate process. If a higher level protocol
uses port numbers, they are assumed to be in the first 64 data
bits of the original datagram's data.
Description
A gateway may discard internet datagrams if it does not have the
buffer space needed to queue the datagrams for output to the next
network on the route to the destination network. If a gateway
[Page 10]
September 1981
RFC 792
discards a datagram, it may send a source quench message to the
internet source host of the datagram. A destination host may also
send a source quench message if datagrams arrive too fast to be
processed. The source quench message is a request to the host to
cut back the rate at which it is sending traffic to the internet
destination. The gateway may send a source quench message for
every message that it discards. On receipt of a source quench
message, the source host should cut back the rate at which it is
sending traffic to the specified destination until it no longer
receives source quench messages from the gateway. The source host
can then gradually increase the rate at which it sends traffic to
the destination until it again receives source quench messages.
The gateway or host may send the source quench message when it
approaches its capacity limit rather than waiting until the
capacity is exceeded. This means that the data datagram which
triggered the source quench message may be delivered.
Code 0 may be received from a gateway or a host.
[Page 11]
September 1981
RFC 792
Redirect Message
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Gateway Internet Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Internet Header + 64 bits of Original Data Datagram |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IP Fields:
Destination Address
The source network and address of the original datagram's data.
ICMP Fields:
Type
5
Code
0 = Redirect datagrams for the Network.
1 = Redirect datagrams for the Host.
2 = Redirect datagrams for the Type of Service and Network.
3 = Redirect datagrams for the Type of Service and Host.
Checksum
The checksum is the 16-bit ones's complement of the one's
complement sum of the ICMP message starting with the ICMP Type.
For computing the checksum , the checksum field should be zero.
This checksum may be replaced in the future.
Gateway Internet Address
Address of the gateway to which traffic for the network specified
in the internet destination network field of the original
datagram's data should be sent.
[Page 12]
September 1981
RFC 792
Internet Header + 64 bits of Data Datagram
The internet header plus the first 64 bits of the original
datagram's data. This data is used by the host to match the
message to the appropriate process. If a higher level protocol
uses port numbers, they are assumed to be in the first 64 data
bits of the original datagram's data.
Description
The gateway sends a redirect message to a host in the following
situation. A gateway, G1, receives an internet datagram from a
host on a network to which the gateway is attached. The gateway,
G1, checks its routing table and obtains the address of the next
gateway, G2, on the route to the datagram's internet destination
network, X. If G2 and the host identified by the internet source
address of the datagram are on the same network, a redirect
message is sent to the host. The redirect message advises the
host to send its traffic for network X directly to gateway G2 as
this is a shorter path to the destination. The gateway forwards
the original datagram's data to its internet destination.
For datagrams with the IP source route options and the gateway
address in the destination address field, a redirect message is
not sent even if there is a better route to the ultimate
destination than the next address in the source route.
Codes 0, 1, 2, and 3 may be received from a gateway.
[Page 13]
September 1981
RFC 792
Echo or Echo Reply Message
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Identifier | Sequence Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data ...
+-+-+-+-+-
IP Fields:
Addresses
The address of the source in an echo message will be the
destination of the echo reply message. To form an echo reply
message, the source and destination addresses are simply reversed,
the type code changed to 0, and the checksum recomputed.
IP Fields:
Type
8 for echo message;
0 for echo reply message.
Code
0
Checksum
The checksum is the 16-bit ones's complement of the one's
complement sum of the ICMP message starting with the ICMP Type.
For computing the checksum , the checksum field should be zero.
If the total length is odd, the received data is padded with one
octet of zeros for computing the checksum. This checksum may be
replaced in the future.
Identifier
If code = 0, an identifier to aid in matching echos and replies,
may be zero.
Sequence Number
[Page 14]
September 1981
RFC 792
If code = 0, a sequence number to aid in matching echos and
replies, may be zero.
Description
The data received in the echo message must be returned in the echo
reply message.
The identifier and sequence number may be used by the echo sender
to aid in matching the replies with the echo requests. For
example, the identifier might be used like a port in TCP or UDP to
identify a session, and the sequence number might be incremented
on each echo request sent. The echoer returns these same values
in the echo reply.
Code 0 may be received from a gateway or a host.
[Page 15]
September 1981
RFC 792
Timestamp or Timestamp Reply Message
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Identifier | Sequence Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Originate Timestamp |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Receive Timestamp |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Transmit Timestamp |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IP Fields:
Addresses
The address of the source in a timestamp message will be the
destination of the timestamp reply message. To form a timestamp
reply message, the source and destination addresses are simply
reversed, the type code changed to 14, and the checksum
recomputed.
IP Fields:
Type
13 for timestamp message;
14 for timestamp reply message.
Code
0
Checksum
The checksum is the 16-bit ones's complement of the one's
complement sum of the ICMP message starting with the ICMP Type.
For computing the checksum , the checksum field should be zero.
This checksum may be replaced in the future.
Identifier
[Page 16]
September 1981
RFC 792
If code = 0, an identifier to aid in matching timestamp and
replies, may be zero.
Sequence Number
If code = 0, a sequence number to aid in matching timestamp and
replies, may be zero.
Description
The data received (a timestamp) in the message is returned in the
reply together with an additional timestamp. The timestamp is 32
bits of milliseconds since midnight UT. One use of these
timestamps is described by Mills [5].
The Originate Timestamp is the time the sender last touched the
message before sending it, the Receive Timestamp is the time the
echoer first touched it on receipt, and the Transmit Timestamp is
the time the echoer last touched the message on sending it.
If the time is not available in miliseconds or cannot be provided
with respect to midnight UT then any time can be inserted in a
timestamp provided the high order bit of the timestamp is also set
to indicate this non-standard value.
The identifier and sequence number may be used by the echo sender
to aid in matching the replies with the requests. For example,
the identifier might be used like a port in TCP or UDP to identify
a session, and the sequence number might be incremented on each
request sent. The destination returns these same values in the
reply.
Code 0 may be received from a gateway or a host.
[Page 17]
September 1981
RFC 792
Information Request or Information Reply Message
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Identifier | Sequence Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IP Fields:
Addresses
The address of the source in a information request message will be
the destination of the information reply message. To form a
information reply message, the source and destination addresses
are simply reversed, the type code changed to 16, and the checksum
recomputed.
IP Fields:
Type
15 for information request message;
16 for information reply message.
Code
0
Checksum
The checksum is the 16-bit ones's complement of the one's
complement sum of the ICMP message starting with the ICMP Type.
For computing the checksum , the checksum field should be zero.
This checksum may be replaced in the future.
Identifier
If code = 0, an identifier to aid in matching request and replies,
may be zero.
Sequence Number
If code = 0, a sequence number to aid in matching request and
replies, may be zero.
[Page 18]
September 1981
RFC 792
Description
This message may be sent with the source network in the IP header
source and destination address fields zero (which means "this"
network). The replying IP module should send the reply with the
addresses fully specified. This message is a way for a host to
find out the number of the network it is on.
The identifier and sequence number may be used by the echo sender
to aid in matching the replies with the requests. For example,
the identifier might be used like a port in TCP or UDP to identify
a session, and the sequence number might be incremented on each
request sent. The destination returns these same values in the
reply.
Code 0 may be received from a gateway or a host.
[Page 19]
September 1981
RFC 792
Summary of Message Types
0 Echo Reply
3 Destination Unreachable
4 Source Quench
5 Redirect
8 Echo
11 Time Exceeded
12 Parameter Problem
13 Timestamp
14 Timestamp Reply
15 Information Request
16 Information Reply
[Page 20]
September 1981
RFC 792
References
[1] Postel, J. (ed.), "Internet Protocol - DARPA Internet Program
Protocol Specification," RFC 791, USC/Information Sciences
Institute, September 1981.
[2] Cerf, V., "The Catenet Model for Internetworking," IEN 48,
Information Processing Techniques Office, Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency, July 1978.
[3] Strazisar, V., "Gateway Routing: An Implementation
Specification", IEN 30, Bolt Beranek and Newman, April 1979.
[4] Strazisar, V., "How to Build a Gateway", IEN 109, Bolt Beranek
and Newman, August 1979.
[5] Mills, D., "DCNET Internet Clock Service," RFC 778, COMSAT
Laboratories, April 1981.