throbber

`Network Working Group
`Request for Comments: 1002 March, 1987
`
`
`
`
` PROTOCOL STANDARD FOR A NetBIOS SERVICE
` ON A TCP/UDP TRANSPORT:
` DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS
`
`
`
`
` ABSTRACT
`
`This RFC defines a proposed standard protocol to support NetBIOS
`services in a TCP/IP environment. Both local network and internet
`operation are supported. Various node types are defined to accommodate
`local and internet topologies and to allow operation with or without the
`use of IP broadcast.
`
`This RFC gives the detailed specifications of the NetBIOS-over-TCP
`packets, protocols, and defined constants and variables. A more general
`overview is found in a companion RFC, "Protocol Standard For a NetBIOS
`Service on a TCP/UDP Transport: Concepts and Methods".
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 1]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 1
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
` TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`1. STATUS OF THIS MEMO 4
`
`2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 4
`
`3. INTRODUCTION 5
`
`4. PACKET DESCRIPTIONS 5
` 4.1 NAME FORMAT 5
` 4.2 NAME SERVICE PACKETS 7
` 4.2.1 GENERAL FORMAT OF NAME SERVICE PACKETS 7
` 4.2.1.1 HEADER 8
` 4.2.1.2 QUESTION SECTION 10
` 4.2.1.3 RESOURCE RECORD 11
` 4.2.2 NAME REGISTRATION REQUEST 13
` 4.2.3 NAME OVERWRITE REQUEST & DEMAND 14
` 4.2.4 NAME REFRESH REQUEST 15
` 4.2.5 POSITIVE NAME REGISTRATION RESPONSE 16
` 4.2.6 NEGATIVE NAME REGISTRATION RESPONSE 16
` 4.2.7 END-NODE CHALLENGE REGISTRATION RESPONSE 17
` 4.2.8 NAME CONFLICT DEMAND 18
` 4.2.9 NAME RELEASE REQUEST & DEMAND 19
` 4.2.10 POSITIVE NAME RELEASE RESPONSE 20
` 4.2.11 NEGATIVE NAME RELEASE RESPONSE 20
` 4.2.12 NAME QUERY REQUEST 21
` 4.2.13 POSITIVE NAME QUERY RESPONSE 22
` 4.2.14 NEGATIVE NAME QUERY RESPONSE 23
` 4.2.15 REDIRECT NAME QUERY RESPONSE 24
` 4.2.16 WAIT FOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT (WACK) RESPONSE 25
` 4.2.17 NODE STATUS REQUEST 26
` 4.2.18 NODE STATUS RESPONSE 27
` 4.3 SESSION SERVICE PACKETS 29
` 4.3.1 GENERAL FORMAT OF SESSION PACKETS 29
` 4.3.2 SESSION REQUEST PACKET 30
` 4.3.3 POSITIVE SESSION RESPONSE PACKET 31
` 4.3.4 NEGATIVE SESSION RESPONSE PACKET 31
` 4.3.5 SESSION RETARGET RESPONSE PACKET 31
` 4.3.6 SESSION MESSAGE PACKET 32
` 4.3.7 SESSION KEEP ALIVE PACKET 32
` 4.4 DATAGRAM SERVICE PACKETS 32
` 4.4.1 NetBIOS DATAGRAM HEADER 32
` 4.4.2 DIRECT_UNIQUE, DIRECT_GROUP, & BROADCAST DATAGRAM 33
` 4.4.3 DATAGRAM ERROR PACKET 34
` 4.4.4 DATAGRAM QUERY REQUEST 34
` 4.4.5 DATAGRAM POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE QUERY RESPONSE 34
`
`5. PROTOCOL DESCRIPTIONS 35
` 5.1 NAME SERVICE PROTOCOLS 35
` 5.1.1 B-NODE ACTIVITY 35
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 2]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 2
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
` 5.1.1.1 B-NODE ADD NAME 35
` 5.1.1.2 B-NODE ADD_GROUP NAME 37
` 5.1.1.3 B-NODE FIND_NAME 37
` 5.1.1.4 B NODE NAME RELEASE 38
` 5.1.1.5 B-NODE INCOMING PACKET PROCESSING 39
` 5.1.2 P-NODE ACTIVITY 42
` 5.1.2.1 P-NODE ADD_NAME 42
` 5.1.2.2 P-NODE ADD GROUP NAME 45
` 5.1.2.3 P-NODE FIND NAME 45
` 5.1.2.4 P-NODE DELETE_NAME 46
` 5.1.2.5 P-NODE INCOMING PACKET PROCESSING 47
` 5.1.2.6 P-NODE TIMER INITIATED PROCESSING 49
` 5.1.3 M-NODE ACTIVITY 50
` 5.1.3.1 M-NODE ADD NAME 50
` 5.1.3.2 M-NODE ADD GROUP NAME 54
` 5.1.3.3 M-NODE FIND NAME 55
` 5.1.3.4 M-NODE DELETE NAME 56
` 5.1.3.5 M-NODE INCOMING PACKET PROCESSING 58
` 5.1.3.6 M-NODE TIMER INITIATED PROCESSING 60
` 5.1.4 NBNS ACTIVITY 60
` 5.1.4.1 NBNS INCOMING PACKET PROCESSING 61
` 5.1.4.2 NBNS TIMER INITIATED PROCESSING 66
` 5.2 SESSION SERVICE PROTOCOLS 67
` 5.2.1 SESSION ESTABLISHMENT PROTOCOLS 67
` 5.2.1.1 USER REQUEST PROCESSING 67
` 5.2.1.2 RECEIVED PACKET PROCESSING 71
` 5.2.2 SESSION DATA TRANSFER PROTOCOLS 72
` 5.2.2.1 USER REQUEST PROCESSING 72
` 5.2.2.2 RECEIVED PACKET PROCESSING 72
` 5.2.2.3 PROCESSING INITIATED BY TIMER 73
` 5.2.3 SESSION TERMINATION PROTOCOLS 73
` 5.2.3.1 USER REQUEST PROCESSING 73
` 5.2.3.2 RECEPTION INDICATION PROCESSING 73
` 5.3 NetBIOS DATAGRAM SERVICE PROTOCOLS 74
` 5.3.1 B NODE TRANSMISSION OF NetBIOS DATAGRAMS 74
` 5.3.2 P AND M NODE TRANSMISSION OF NetBIOS DATAGRAMS 76
` 5.3.3 RECEPTION OF NetBIOS DATAGRAMS BY ALL NODES 78
` 5.3.4 PROTOCOLS FOR THE NBDD 80
`
`6. DEFINED CONSTANTS AND VARIABLES 83
`
`REFERENCES 85
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 3]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 3
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
` PROTOCOL STANDARD FOR A NetBIOS SERVICE
` ON A TCP/UDP TRANSPORT:
` DETAILED SPECIFICATIONS
`
`
`1. STATUS OF THIS MEMO
`
` This RFC specifies a proposed standard for the DARPA Internet
` community. Since this topic is new to the Internet community,
` discussions and suggestions are specifically requested.
`
` Please send written comments to:
`
` Karl Auerbach
` Epilogue Technology Corporation
` P.O. Box 5432
` Redwood City, CA 94063
`
` Please send online comments to:
`
` Avnish Aggarwal
` Internet: mtxinu!excelan!avnish@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
` Usenet: ucbvax!mtxinu!excelan!avnish
`
` Distribution of this memorandum is unlimited.
`
`2. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
`
` This RFC has been developed under the auspices of the Internet
` Activities Board.
`
` The following individuals have contributed to the development of
` this RFC:
`
` Avnish Aggarwal Arvind Agrawal Lorenzo Aguilar
` Geoffrey Arnold Karl Auerbach K. Ramesh Babu
` Keith Ball Amatzia Ben-Artzi Vint Cerf
` Richard Cherry David Crocker Steve Deering
` Greg Ennis Steve Holmgren Jay Israel
` David Kaufman Lee LaBarre James Lau
` Dan Lynch Gaylord Miyata David Stevens
` Steve Thomas Ishan Wu
`
` The system proposed by this RFC does not reflect any existing
` Netbios-over-TCP implementation. However, the design
` incorporates considerable knowledge obtained from prior
` implementations. Special thanks goes to the following
` organizations which have provided this invaluable information:
`
` CMC/Syros Excelan Sytek Ungermann-Bass
`
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 4]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 4
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
`3. INTRODUCTION
`
` This RFC contains the detailed packet formats and protocol
` specifications for NetBIOS-over-TCP. This RFC is a companion to
` RFC 1001, "Protocol Standard For a NetBIOS Service on a TCP/UDP
` Transport: Concepts and Methods" [1].
`
`4. PACKET DESCRIPTIONS
`
` Bit and byte ordering are defined by the most recent version of
` "Assigned Numbers" [2].
`
`4.1. NAME FORMAT
`
` The NetBIOS name representation in all NetBIOS packets (for NAME,
` SESSION, and DATAGRAM services) is defined in the Domain Name
` Service RFC 883[3] as "compressed" name messages. This format is
` called "second-level encoding" in the section entitled
` "Representation of NetBIOS Names" in the Concepts and Methods
` document.
`
` For ease of description, the first two paragraphs from page 31,
` the section titled "Domain name representation and compression",
` of RFC 883 are replicated here:
`
` Domain names messages are expressed in terms of a sequence
` of labels. Each label is represented as a one octet length
` field followed by that number of octets. Since every domain
` name ends with the null label of the root, a compressed
` domain name is terminated by a length byte of zero. The
` high order two bits of the length field must be zero, and
` the remaining six bits of the length field limit the label
` to 63 octets or less.
`
` To simplify implementations, the total length of label
` octets and label length octets that make up a domain name is
` restricted to 255 octets or less.
`
` The following is the uncompressed representation of the NetBIOS name
` "FRED ", which is the 4 ASCII characters, F, R, E, D, followed by 12
` space characters (0x20). This name has the SCOPE_ID: "NETBIOS.COM"
`
` EGFCEFEECACACACACACACACACACACACA.NETBIOS.COM
`
` This uncompressed representation of names is called "first-level
` encoding" in the section entitled "Representation of NetBIOS Names"
` in the Concepts and Methods document.
`
` The following is a pictographic representation of the compressed
` representation of the previous uncompressed Domain Name
` representation.
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 5]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 5
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
` 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
` 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | 0x20 | E (0x45) | G (0x47) | F (0x46) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | C (0x43) | E (0x45) | F (0x46) | E (0x45) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | E (0x45) | C (0x43) | A (0x41) | C (0x43) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | A (0x41) | C (0x43) | A (0x41) | C (0x43) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | A (0x41) | C (0x43) | A (0x41) | C (0x43) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | A (0x41) | C (0x43) | A (0x41) | C (0x43) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | A (0x41) | C (0x43) | A (0x41) | C (0x43) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | A (0x41) | C (0x43) | A (0x41) | C (0x43) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | A (0X41) | 0x07 | N (0x4E) | E (0x45) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | T (0x54) | B (0x42) | I (0x49) | O (0x4F) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | S (0x53) | 0x03 | C (0x43) | O (0x4F) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | M (0x4D) | 0x00 |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
`
` Each section of a domain name is called a label [7 (page 31)]. A
` label can be a maximum of 63 bytes. The first byte of a label in
` compressed representation is the number of bytes in the label. For
` the above example, the first 0x20 is the number of bytes in the
` left-most label, EGFCEFEECACACACACACACACACACACACA, of the domain
` name. The bytes following the label length count are the characters
` of the label. The following labels are in sequence after the first
` label, which is the encoded NetBIOS name, until a zero (0x00) length
` count. The zero length count represents the root label, which is
` always null.
`
` A label length count is actually a 6-bit field in the label length
` field. The most significant 2 bits of the field, bits 7 and 6, are
` flags allowing an escape from the above compressed representation.
` If bits 7 and 6 are both set (11), the following 14 bits are an
` offset pointer into the full message to the actual label string from
` another domain name that belongs in this name. This label pointer
` allows for a further compression of a domain name in a packet.
`
` NetBIOS implementations can only use label string pointers in Name
` Service packets. They cannot be used in Session or Datagram Service
` packets.
`
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 6]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 6
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
` The other two possible values for bits 7 and 6 (01 and 10) of a label
` length field are reserved for future use by RFC 883[2 (page 32)].
`
` Note that the first octet of a compressed name must contain one of
` the following bit patterns. (An "x" indicates a bit whose value may
` be either 0 or 1.):
`
` 00100000 - Netbios name, length must be 32 (decimal)
` 11xxxxxx - Label string pointer
` 10xxxxxx - Reserved
` 01xxxxxx - Reserved
`
`4.2. NAME SERVICE PACKETS
`
`4.2.1. GENERAL FORMAT OF NAME SERVICE PACKETS
`
` The NetBIOS Name Service packets follow the packet structure defined
` in the Domain Name Service (DNS) RFC 883 [7 (pg 26-31)]. The
` structures are compatible with the existing DNS packet formats,
` however, additional types and codes have been added to work with
` NetBIOS.
`
` If Name Service packets are sent over a TCP connection they are
` preceded by a 16 bit unsigned integer representing the length of the
` Name Service packet.
`
` 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
` 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | |
` + ------ ------- +
` | HEADER |
` + ------ ------- +
` | |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | |
` / QUESTION ENTRIES /
` | |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | |
` / ANSWER RESOURCE RECORDS /
` | |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | |
` / AUTHORITY RESOURCE RECORDS /
` | |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | |
` / ADDITIONAL RESOURCE RECORDS /
` | |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 7]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 7
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
`4.2.1.1. HEADER
`
` 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
` 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | NAME_TRN_ID | OPCODE | NM_FLAGS | RCODE |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | QDCOUNT | ANCOUNT |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | NSCOUNT | ARCOUNT |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
`
` Field Description
`
` NAME_TRN_ID Transaction ID for Name Service Transaction.
` Requestor places a unique value for each active
` transaction. Responder puts NAME_TRN_ID value
` from request packet in response packet.
`
` OPCODE Packet type code, see table below.
`
` NM_FLAGS Flags for operation, see table below.
`
` RCODE Result codes of request. Table of RCODE values
` for each response packet below.
`
` QDCOUNT Unsigned 16 bit integer specifying the number of
` entries in the question section of a Name
`
` Service packet. Always zero (0) for responses.
` Must be non-zero for all NetBIOS Name requests.
`
` ANCOUNT Unsigned 16 bit integer specifying the number of
` resource records in the answer section of a Name
` Service packet.
`
` NSCOUNT Unsigned 16 bit integer specifying the number of
` resource records in the authority section of a
` Name Service packet.
`
` ARCOUNT Unsigned 16 bit integer specifying the number of
` resource records in the additional records
` section of a Name Service packet.
`
` The OPCODE field is defined as:
`
` 0 1 2 3 4
` +---+---+---+---+---+
` | R | OPCODE |
` +---+---+---+---+---+
`
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 8]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 8
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
` Symbol Bit(s) Description
`
` OPCODE 1-4 Operation specifier:
` 0 = query
` 5 = registration
` 6 = release
` 7 = WACK
` 8 = refresh
`
` R 0 RESPONSE flag:
` if bit == 0 then request packet
` if bit == 1 then response packet.
`
` The NM_FLAGS field is defined as:
`
`
` 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
` +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
` |AA |TC |RD |RA | 0 | 0 | B |
` +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
`
` Symbol Bit(s) Description
`
` B 6 Broadcast Flag.
` = 1: packet was broadcast or multicast
` = 0: unicast
`
` RA 3 Recursion Available Flag.
`
` Only valid in responses from a NetBIOS Name
` Server -- must be zero in all other
` responses.
`
` If one (1) then the NBNS supports recursive
` query, registration, and release.
`
` If zero (0) then the end-node must iterate
` for query and challenge for registration.
`
` RD 2 Recursion Desired Flag.
`
` May only be set on a request to a NetBIOS
` Name Server.
`
` The NBNS will copy its state into the
` response packet.
`
` If one (1) the NBNS will iterate on the
` query, registration, or release.
`
` TC 1 Truncation Flag.
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 9]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 9
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
` Set if this message was truncated because the
` datagram carrying it would be greater than
` 576 bytes in length. Use TCP to get the
` information from the NetBIOS Name Server.
`
` AA 0 Authoritative Answer flag.
`
` Must be zero (0) if R flag of OPCODE is zero
` (0).
`
` If R flag is one (1) then if AA is one (1)
` then the node responding is an authority for
` the domain name.
`
` End nodes responding to queries always set
` this bit in responses.
`
`4.2.1.2. QUESTION SECTION
`
` 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
` 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | |
` / QUESTION_NAME /
` / /
` | |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | QUESTION_TYPE | QUESTION_CLASS |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
`
` Field Description
`
` QUESTION_NAME The compressed name representation of the
` NetBIOS name for the request.
`
` QUESTION_TYPE The type of request. The values for this field
` are specified for each request.
`
` QUESTION_CLASS The class of the request. The values for this
` field are specified for each request.
`
` QUESTION_TYPE is defined as:
`
` Symbol Value Description:
`
` NB 0x0020 NetBIOS general Name Service Resource Record
` NBSTAT 0x0021 NetBIOS NODE STATUS Resource Record (See NODE
` STATUS REQUEST)
`
` QUESTION_CLASS is defined as:
`
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 10]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 10
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
` Symbol Value Description:
`
` IN 0x0001 Internet class
`
`4.2.1.3. RESOURCE RECORD
`
` 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
` 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | |
` / RR_NAME /
` / /
` | |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | RR_TYPE | RR_CLASS |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | TTL |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | RDLENGTH | |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
` / /
` / RDATA /
` | |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
`
` Field Description
`
` RR_NAME The compressed name representation of the
` NetBIOS name corresponding to this resource
` record.
`
` RR_TYPE Resource record type code
`
` RR_CLASS Resource record class code
`
` TTL The Time To Live of a the resource record's
` name.
`
` RDLENGTH Unsigned 16 bit integer that specifies the
` number of bytes in the RDATA field.
`
` RDATA RR_CLASS and RR_TYPE dependent field. Contains
` the resource information for the NetBIOS name.
`
` RESOURCE RECORD RR_TYPE field definitions:
`
` Symbol Value Description:
`
` A 0x0001 IP address Resource Record (See REDIRECT NAME
` QUERY RESPONSE)
` NS 0x0002 Name Server Resource Record (See REDIRECT
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 11]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 11
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
` NAME QUERY RESPONSE)
` NULL 0x000A NULL Resource Record (See WAIT FOR
` ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RESPONSE)
` NB 0x0020 NetBIOS general Name Service Resource Record
` (See NB_FLAGS and NB_ADDRESS, below)
` NBSTAT 0x0021 NetBIOS NODE STATUS Resource Record (See NODE
` STATUS RESPONSE)
`
` RESOURCE RECORD RR_CLASS field definitions:
`
` Symbol Value Description:
`
` IN 0x0001 Internet class
`
` NB_FLAGS field of the RESOURCE RECORD RDATA field for RR_TYPE of
` "NB":
`
` 1 1 1 1 1 1
` 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
` +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
` | G | ONT | RESERVED |
` +---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
`
` Symbol Bit(s) Description:
`
` RESERVED 3-15 Reserved for future use. Must be zero (0).
` ONT 1,2 Owner Node Type:
` 00 = B node
` 01 = P node
` 10 = M node
` 11 = Reserved for future use
` For registration requests this is the
` claimant's type.
` For responses this is the actual owner's
` type.
`
` G 0 Group Name Flag.
` If one (1) then the RR_NAME is a GROUP
` NetBIOS name.
` If zero (0) then the RR_NAME is a UNIQUE
` NetBIOS name.
`
` The NB_ADDRESS field of the RESOURCE RECORD RDATA field for
` RR_TYPE of "NB" is the IP address of the name's owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 12]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 12
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
`4.2.2. NAME REGISTRATION REQUEST
`
` 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
` 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | NAME_TRN_ID |0| 0x5 |0|0|1|0|0 0|B| 0x0 |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | 0x0001 | 0x0000 |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | 0x0000 | 0x0001 |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | |
` / QUESTION_NAME /
` / /
` | |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | NB (0x0020) | IN (0x0001) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | |
` / RR_NAME /
` / /
` | |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | NB (0x0020) | IN (0x0001) |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | TTL |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | 0x0006 | NB_FLAGS |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | NB_ADDRESS |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
`
` Since the RR_NAME is the same name as the QUESTION_NAME, the
` RR_NAME representation must use pointers to the QUESTION_NAME
` name's labels to guarantee the length of the datagram is less
` than the maximum 576 bytes. See section above on name formats
` and also page 31 and 32 of RFC 883, Domain Names - Implementation
` and Specification, for a complete description of compressed name
` label pointers.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NetBIOS Working Group [Page 13]
`
`
`
`Cisco - Exhibit 1032 - Page 13
`
`

`

`RFC 1002 March 1987
`
`
`4.2.3. NAME OVERWRITE REQUEST & DEMAND
`
` 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3
` 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | NAME_TRN_ID |0| 0x5 |0|0|0|0|0 0|B| 0x0 |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
` | 0x0001 | 0x0000 |
` +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket