From owner-freebsd-atm Mon Mar 30 07:16:15 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id HAA16582 for freebsd-atm-outgoing; Mon, 30 Mar 1998 07:16:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from plains.NoDak.edu (tinguely@plains.NoDak.edu [134.129.111.64]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id HAA16572 for ; Mon, 30 Mar 1998 07:16:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tinguely@plains.NoDak.edu) Received: (from tinguely@localhost) by plains.NoDak.edu (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA04644; Mon, 30 Mar 1998 09:16:04 -0600 (CST) Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 09:16:04 -0600 (CST) From: Mark Tinguely Message-Id: <199803301516.JAA04644@plains.NoDak.edu> To: reddawg@shellz.malicia.com, tinguely@plains.NoDak.edu Subject: Re: OC3 Cc: freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Mark, I emailed the place thats going to be at the other end of the atm > and they told me they will be doing ip over atm. I plan on getting an > efficient 155Mbit atm card and im going to use the phone companies fiber > is that all I will need? ah the joys of ATM. Is the phone company going to connect you with a Permanent Virtual Circuit (PVC), or is it going to be a Switched Virtual Circuit (SVC)? If it is SVC, which signalling protocol do they expect you to run (UNI, SPANS, NNI, etc). Since you are running Classical IP over ATM, then using the HARP (http://www.msci.magic.net/harp/) looks promising, provided you phone company uses either UNI 3.0 or FORE Systems' SPANS signalling protocol. If they need a network to network signalling protocol, you are in trouble. Also, to the best of my knowledge, the HARP stack does not offer quality of service, so you may inquire with the phone company what their expectations of the connection (CBR, ABR, UBR). I am carboning this back to the freebsd-atm group in case I forgot a question that you will need to ask. --mark. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-atm" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-atm Tue Mar 31 09:13:45 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA23290 for freebsd-atm-outgoing; Tue, 31 Mar 1998 09:13:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from marcos.networkcs.com (marcos.networkcs.com [137.66.16.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA23267 for ; Tue, 31 Mar 1998 09:13:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from salo@us.networkcs.com) Received: from us.networkcs.com (us.networkcs.com [137.66.11.15]) by marcos.networkcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id LAA22282; Tue, 31 Mar 1998 11:12:14 -0600 (CST) Received: (from salo@localhost) by us.networkcs.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id LAA07876; Tue, 31 Mar 1998 11:12:12 -0600 (CST) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 11:12:12 -0600 (CST) From: Tim Salo Message-Id: <199803311712.LAA07876@us.networkcs.com> To: reddawg@shellz.malicia.com Subject: Re: OC3 Cc: freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Date: Thu, 26 Mar 1998 16:20:14 -0500 (EST) > From: Christopher > To: Mark Tinguely > cc: freebsd-atm@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: OC3 > > Im not sure im new to atm i do know on the other end will be a cisco and > im not sure what that would use over the atm. > > > > How would i go about making a freebsd box into an oc3 router that would > > > take place of a cisco? You, in some sense, need to ensure that both devices agree on what protocol to use at each layer in the protocol stack. Perhaps, o ATM: PVCs or SVCs, UNI 3.0/3.1 SVCs versus (maybe/unlikely) UNI 4.0 o AAL: AAL5 is typical, but at least one ATM DSU uses only AAL3/4, (don't use that ADSU...) o Encapsulation: LLC/SNAP is typical, but sometimes null encapsulation is used. Some odd devices, perhaps some ADSUs, might use NLPID encapsulation. (FR/ATM interworking devices might use NLPID; I don't know, I have never seen one.) See RFC 1483. o IP/ATM Convergence Sublayer (does this stuff have name): The two major choices are IETF Classical IP (RFC 1577) and ATM Forum LANE (LAN emulation). The two standards (or, is that "standards"?) don't interoperate. Some software supports one but not the other. This is probably the most important protocol choice to ensure that you get right. o IP/ATM Short-Cut Sublayer (I am pretty sure this doesn't have a name.) The IETF says NHRP while the ATM Forum says MPOA. This shouldn't be an issue for you; I included it just for the sake of completeness. (The IETF and the ATM Forum say MPOA and NHRP interoperate. I wonder if anyone has tried.) If you get this far, your higher layers should be no problem. I believe that you will be (far) better off if the Cisco router on the other end has a native ATM interface (e.g., an AIP card) rather than a HSSI interface with an external ATM DSU. (Details available on request, I suppose. Someday I should finish writing the whole story...) -tjs To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-atm" in the body of the message