Ethereal-users: Re: [Ethereal-users] (Slightly OT) Ethernet length question
Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.
From: Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 13:57:46 +0100 (CET)
Hi, You skipped the a) clause! This is from the 1998 version I've got laying around: 7.2 Support of the Internal Sublayer Service by IEEE Std 802.3 (CSMA/CD) ...... a) Use the procedure as described in ISO/IEC 15802-3, 6.5.1. This can result in tagged frames of less than 68 octets (but at least 64 octets) being transmitted; or ...... So at least 64 octets on the wire, either with or without VLAN tag. Sorry, Jaap On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 Ran.Shenhar@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > OK, thanks for the clarification. > However, in the meantime I also conducted another search, and I found two > sources - > 1. IEEE 802.1Q (2003), see pg 39 (actual page, including all prefaces etc), > look near the end (specifically at the sentence "Include additional octets > before the FCS field in order for the transmitted frame length for such > frames to be 68 octets. This results in a minimum tagged frame length of 68 > octets.") > (the file can be found here: ftp://ftp.ecitele.com/notes/IEEE802.1-Q.-2003 > _(VLAN).pdf) > 2. According to CISCO - 68 bytes ( > http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk389/tk390/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094665.shtml#frame2 > ) > > Now, my problem is that I got a bet with R&D guys around here, and it seems > my sources say that it's 68 bytes, and you're saying it's 64... or have I > misunderstood the IEEE doc?? > > TnX > > > > Jaap Keuter > <jaap.keuter@xs4a > ll.nl> To > Sent by: Ethereal user support > ethereal-users-bo <ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > unces@xxxxxxxxxxx cc > m > Subject > Re: [Ethereal-users] (Slightly OT) > 18/01/2006 13:34 Ethernet length question > > > Please respond to > Ethereal user > support > <ethereal-users@e > thereal.com> > > > > > > > Hi, > > What you should decouple is the minumum 64 octet Ethernet requirement > from the actual use of these octets. > > The 802.1Q spec only tells you that if the Ethernet II header contains a > type value of 0x8100 the next two octets are to be interpreted as VLAN > tag. That defines use. > > When a frame is present on the wire it needs to be minimum 64 octets, > whatever the use of these octets. > > These are seperate things. > > Hope it helps, > Jaap > > > > On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 Ran.Shenhar@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > TnX Jaap, > > I know the CSMA/CD principles behind the 64 byte minimum requirement. > > However, my question is really focused on the 802.1Q change (or no > change) > > in that demand, and I didn't understand the answer for that issue from > your > > answer. > > Could you please try to clarify? > > > > TnX > > > > > > > > Jaap Keuter > > <jaap.keuter@xs4a > > ll.nl> > To > > Sent by: Ethereal user support > > ethereal-users-bo <ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > unces@xxxxxxxxxxx > cc > > m > > > Subject > > Re: [Ethereal-users] (Slightly OT) > > 18/01/2006 11:54 Ethernet length question > > > > > > Please respond to > > Ethereal user > > support > > <ethereal-users@e > > thereal.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > The layer protocol model is the best reference you can take in mind. > > The minimum ethernet frame length (that is bits on the wire) is 64*8. > > Together with the wirespeed this gives a minimum amount of transmission > > time. This time is needed for the other endpoint (in a point-to-point > > link) or other stations (on a shared medium) to assure recognition of the > > frame and collision avoidance. All this is Physical layer stuff. > > > > Then comes the meaning of the bits in the frame. If the ethernet header > > says that it's a VLAN tag that is following then the next 2 octets are to > > be interpreted that way. From there on the next protocol layer starts. > > > > That is the true meaning of VLAN, a VIRTUAL LAN. It's not a real one, as > > seen on the wires, but on a layer above that. > > > > Hope it helps, > > Jaap > > > > > > On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 Ran.Shenhar@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > I need help with a non-ethereal specific - I know that an ethernet > frame > > is > > > of minimum length = 64 bytes, including FCS. > > > However, what is the minimum length of a VLAN tagged ethernet frame? Is > > it > > > 64+4, or is it still 64? > > > > > > I tried looking in IEEE 802.3q 2003 edition, however I was not able to > > find > > > a definite answer. > > > If you could also point me to a reference about the answer, it'd be > even > > > better. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ethereal-users mailing list > > Ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-users > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ethereal-users mailing list > > Ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx > > http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-users > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ethereal-users mailing list > Ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-users > > > _______________________________________________ > Ethereal-users mailing list > Ethereal-users@xxxxxxxxxxxx > http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-users >
- Follow-Ups:
- [Ethereal-users] Another promiscuous mode question
- From: Ran . Shenhar
- [Ethereal-users] Another promiscuous mode question
- References:
- Re: [Ethereal-users] (Slightly OT) Ethernet length question
- From: Ran . Shenhar
- Re: [Ethereal-users] (Slightly OT) Ethernet length question
- Prev by Date: [Ethereal-users] Hethereal
- Next by Date: Re: [Ethereal-users] display filter problem...
- Previous by thread: Re: [Ethereal-users] (Slightly OT) Ethernet length question
- Next by thread: [Ethereal-users] Another promiscuous mode question
- Index(es):