The IP over ATM Mailing List Archive by date

[asmith@Baynetworks.COM (Andrew Smith)]

Of course, I've already had substantial grief from LANE having
chosen 0000 as a "special" code. This mostly comes from IEEE
people who claim this is a "reserved" value, at least in 802.3
sorts of packets. Is there a 00 NLPID allocated?

Practically speaking, I've no problem with the proposed scheme.


Andrew 

********************************************************************************
Andrew Smith					TEL:	+1 408 764 1574
Technology Synergy Unit				FAX:	+1 408 988 5525
Bay Networks, Inc.				E-m:	asmith@baynetworks.com
Santa Clara, CA
********************************************************************************



> From atmpost@matmos.hpl.hp.com Tue Oct 10 12:43:56 1995
> To: ip-atm@matmos.hpl.hp.com
> Cc: gja@thumper.bellcore.com
> Subject: denser ar$pro space.
> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 15:28:54 -0400
> From: Grenville Armitage <gja@thumper.bellcore.com>
> Content-Length: 723
> 
> 
> FYI - in some offline discussion last week Keith McCloghrie
> observed that a 16 bit ar$pro space could be further subdivided in
> a logical fashion to include the NPLID space. I'm posting this
> to for contemplation by the WG (and to ensure Keith gets
> public attribution for this neat idea).
> 
> The description of ar$pro would now read:
> 
>       0x0000 to 0x00FF  Protocols defined by the equivalent NPLIDs.
>       0x0100 to 0x03FF  Reserved for future use by the IETF.
>       0x0400 to 0x05FF  Designated for use by the ATM Forum.
>       0x0600 to 0xFFFF  Protocols defined by the equivalent Ethertypes.
> 
> (based on the observations that valid Ethertypes are never smaller
> than 0x600, and NPLIDs never larger than 0xFF.)
> 
> cheers,
> gja
>