Cell Relay Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>List Archive>month:2000-Jun> msg00041



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Re: Different IP/ATM Encapsulations

  • From: - <bo@gmx.de>
  • Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 11:38:42 +0200
  • Organization: Technical University Berlin, Germany


Hello,
have a look at http://www.protocols.com/pbook/atmenca.htm
Joern


George Matey schrieb:

> Paul Koning wrote:
> >
> > Kaushik Kuila wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello World!
> > >   I know about LLCSNAP and NULL ENCAPSULATIONS for transmission of IP datagrams
> > > over AAL5. Are there any other common encapsulations for transmitting IP over
> > > ATM ?
> >
> > It's really only the LLC/SNAP one.  Null doesn't work for IP because
> > you can't send InARP packets over the same VC then...  don't know why
> > it even appears as an option.
>
> Null certainly does work for IP; for PVCs, all you need is either a
> static adjacency (user configured) or a forwarding implementation
> which can correlate an IP subnet with a PVC and forward on that (both
> cisco and Juniper support this).
>
> Why use Null?  For those ISPs that used ATM as transport, some used
> Null to get better throughput from their ATM links.
>
> --
> George
>
> >
> > Another possibility would be to send IP packets in ethernet format
> > over an Ethernet bridged encapsulation.  That will show up if
> > you're doing bridging.  Apart from that, I wouldn't expect it; the
> > LLC format is the main one.
> >
> >         paul