Link Layer

Where we are in the Course

• Moving on up to the Link Layer!

Application

Transport

Network

Link

Physical

CSE 461 University of Washington 2

 Scope of the Link Layer
• Concerns how to transfer messages over one or
more connected links
• Messages are frames, of limited size
• Builds on the physical layer
• How to transfer bits
Frame

CSE 461 University of Washington 3

In terms of layers …

Network

Link
Virtual data path

Physical Actual data path

CSE 461 University of Washington 4

In terms of layers (2)

Network

Link
Virtual data path

Physical Actual data path

CSE 461 University of Washington 5

Typical Implementation of Layers (2)

CSE 461 University of Washington 6

Topics
1. Framing
• Delimiting start/end of frames
2. Error detection and correction
• Handling errors
3. Retransmissions
• Handling loss
4. Multiple Access
• 802.11, classic Ethernet
5. Switching
• Modern Ethernet

CSE 461 University of Washington 7

Framing
Delimiting start/end of frames
Topic
• The Physical layer gives us a stream of bits. How do
we interpret it as a sequence of frames?

Um?

…10110 …

CSE 461 University of Washington 9

Framing Methods
• We’ll look at:
• Byte count (motivation)
• Byte stuffing
• Bit stuffing

• In practice, the physical layer often helps to identify frame boundaries

• E.g., Ethernet, 802.11

CSE 461 University of Washington 10

Byte Count
• First try:
• Let’s start each frame with a length field
• It’s simple, and hopefully good enough …

CSE 461 University of Washington 11

Byte Count (2)

• How well do you think it works?

CSE 461 University of Washington 12

Byte Count (3)
• Difficult to re-synchronize after framing error
• Want a way to scan for a start of frame

CSE 461 University of Washington 13

Byte Stuffing
• Better idea:
• Have a special flag byte value for start/end of frame
• Replace (“stuff”) the flag with an escape code
• Complication: have to escape the escape code too!

CSE 461 University of Washington 14

Byte Stuffing
• Rules:
• Replace each FLAG in data with ESC FLAG
• Replace each ESC in data with ESC ESC

CSE 461 University of Washington 15

Byte Stuffing
• Now any unescaped FLAG is the start/end of a frame

CSE 461 University of Washington 16

Bit Stuffing
• Can stuff at the bit level too
• Call a flag six consecutive 1s
• On transmit, after five 1s in the data, insert a 0
• On receive, a 0 after five 1s is deleted

CSE 461 University of Washington 17

Bit Stuffing
• Example:

Data bits

Transmitted bits
with stuffing

CSE 461 University of Washington 18

Bit Stuffing
• So how does it compare with byte stuffing?

Data bits

Transmitted bits
with stuffing

CSE 461 University of Washington 19

Link Example: PPP over SONET
• PPP is Point-to-Point Protocol
• Widely used for link framing
• E.g., it is used to frame IP packets that are sent over SONET optical links

CSE 461 University of Washington 20

Link Example: PPP over SONET (2)
• Think of SONET as a bit stream, and PPP as the framing that carries an
IP packet over the link

PPP frames may be split over

Protocol stacks SONET payloads

CSE 461 University of Washington 21

Link Example: PPP over SONET (3)
• Framing uses byte stuffing
• FLAG is 0x7E and ESC is 0x7D

CSE 461 University of Washington 22

Link Example: PPP over SONET (4)
• Byte stuffing method:
• To stuff (unstuff) a byte
• add (remove) ESC (0x7D)
• and XOR byte with 0x20
• Removes FLAG from the contents of the frame

CSE 461 University of Washington 23

Error detection and correction
Handling errors
Topic
• Some bits will be received in error due to noise.
What can we do?
• Detect errors with codes
• Correct errors with codes
•Reliability is a concern that cuts across the layers

CSE 461 University of Washington 25

Problem – Noise may flip received bits
1 1 1
Signal
0 0 0 0 0

Slightly 1 1 1
Noisy 0 0 0 0 0

Very 1 1 1
noisy 0 0 0 0 0

CSE 461 University of Washington 26

Approach – Add Redundancy
• Error detection codes
• Add check bits to the message bits to let some errors be
detected
• Error correction codes
• Add more check bits to allow correction of some errors

• Key issue is now to structure the code to detect

many errors with few check bits and modest
computation
CSE 461 University of Washington 27
• Ideas?
Motivating Example
• A simple code to handle errors:
• Send two copies!
• Error if differ from each other.

• How good is this code?

• How many bit errors can it detect?
• What is the minimum number of bit errors that could cause it to
make a mistake?
• How many bit errors can it correct?

CSE 461 University of Washington 29

Motivating Example
• We want to handle more errors with less overhead
• Will look at better codes
• But, they can’t handle all errors
• And they focus on accidental errors (not an attacker - will
look at secure hashes later)

CSE 461 University of Washington 30

Using Error Codes
• Codeword consists of D data plus R check bits
(=systematic block code)
Data bits Check bits
D R=fn(D)

• Sender:
• Compute R check bits based on the D data bits; send the
codeword of D+R bits
CSE 461 University of Washington 31
Using Error Codes
• Receiver:
• Receive D+R bits with unknown errors
• Recompute R check bits based on the D data bits; error if
R doesn’t match R’
Data bits Check bits
D R’
=?
R=fn(D)

CSE 461 University of Washington 32

Intuition for Error Codes
• For D data bits, R check bits:
All codewords of
length D+R
Correct
codewords

• Randomly chosen codeword is unlikely to be

correct; overhead is low
CSE 461 University of Washington 33
Hamming Distance
• Distance is the number of bit flips needed to change
D1 to D2

• Hamming distance of a coding is the minimum

distance between any pair of valid codewords
• How many bits must be flipped to turn one legal codeword into another?

CSE 461 University of Washington 34

Hamming Distance
• Error detection:
• For a coding of distance d+1, up to d errors will always be
detected
• Error correction:
• For a coding of distance 2d+1, up to d errors can always
be corrected
• map to the closest valid codeword (there can be only one)

CSE 461 University of Washington 35

Parity Bit - Simple Error Detection
• Take D data bits, add 1 check bit that is the sum of
the D bits
• “Sum” is modulo 2 or XOR
• This is called even parity

• Overhead is one bit, not matter how big D is

CSE 461 University of Washington 36

Parity Bit
• How well does parity work?
• What is the distance of the code?
• How many errors will it detect/correct?

• What happen if there are more errors?

CSE 461 University of Washington 37

Checksums
• Like parity, number of check bits is independent of
the amount of data
1500 bytes 16 bits

• Idea: sum up data in N-bit words

• Widely used in, e.g., TCP/IP/UDP

• Stronger protection than parity

CSE 461 University of Washington 38
Internet Checksum
• Sum is defined in 1s complement arithmetic (must
add back carries)
• And it’s the negative sum
• “The checksum field is the 16 bit one's complement of the
one's complement sum of all 16 bit words …” – RFC 791

CSE 461 University of Washington 39

 Internet Checksum
Sending: 0001
f204
1.Arrange data in 16-bit words f4f5
2.Put zero in checksum position, add f6f7
+(0000)
3.Add any carryover back to get 16 bits ------
4.Negate (complement) to get sum 2ddf0
ddf0
+ 2
------
ddf2
220d
CSE 461 University of Washington 40
 Internet Checksum
0001
Sending: f204
1.Arrange data in 16-bit words f4f5
f6f7
2.Put zero in checksum position, add +(0000)
3.Add any carryover back to get 16 bits ------
2ddf1
4.Negate (complement) to get sum
ddf1
+ 2
------
ddf3
220c
CSE 461 University of Washington 41
 Internet Checksum
Receiving: 0001
f204
1. Arrange data in 16-bit words f4f5
2. Checksum will be non-zero, add f6f7
+ 220c
3. Add any carryover back to get 16 bits ------
4. Negate the result and check it is 0 2fffd
fffd
+ 2
------
ffff
0000
CSE 461 University of Washington 42
 Internet Checksum
Receiving: 0001
f204
1. Arrange data in 16-bit words f4f5
2. Checksum will be non-zero, add f6f7
+ 220c
3. Add any carryover back to get 16 bits ------
4. Negate the result and check it is 0 2fffd
fffd
+ 2
------
ffff
0000
CSE 461 University of Washington 43
Internet Checksum
• How well does the checksum work?
• What is the distance of the code?
• How many errors will it detect/correct?

• What about larger errors?

CSE 461 University of Washington 44

Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC)
• Even stronger protection
• Given n data bits, generate k check bits such that the n+k
bits are evenly divisible by a generator C
• Example with numbers:
• n = 302, k = one digit, C = 3

CSE 461 University of Washington 45

CRCs
• The catch:
• It’s based on mathematics of finite fields, in which bit strings represent
polynomials
7 4 3 1
• e.g, 10011010 is x + x + x + x

• What this means:

• We work with binary values and operate using modulo 2 arithmetic

CSE 461 University of Washington 46

CRCs
• Send Procedure:
1. Extend the n data bits with k zeros
2. Divide by the generator value C
3. Keep remainder, ignore quotient
4. Adjust k check bits by remainder

• Receive Procedure:
1. Divide and check for zero remainder

CSE 461 University of Washington 47

 CRCs

Data bits: 100111 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1

1101011111
Check bits:
C(x)=x4+x1+1
C = 10011
k=4

CSE 461 University of Washington 48

CRCs

CSE 461 University of Washington 49

CRCs
• Protection depend on generator
• Standard CRC-32 is 10000010 01100000 10001110 110110111

• Properties:
• HD=4, detects up to triple bit errors
• Also odd number of errors
• And bursts of up to k bits in error
• Not vulnerable to systematic errors like checksums

CSE 461 University of Washington 50