Module 3

Data Link Layer

10.1 Copyright © The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Permission required for reproduction or display.
 Note

Data Link Control

&

Medium Access Control

are the 2 main functions of

Data Link Layer

10.2
 Data Link Layer
 Data Link Control
 Node – Node communication
 Framing
 Flow Control
 Error Control
 Software Implemented Protocols
 Smooth and Reliable Transmission of Frames bet Nodes
 Medium Access Control
 Resolving access to shared media
 Nodes connected to use common link (multipoint/broadcast)
 Coordinated access to the link
 3 categories of Protocols (Random Access, Controlled
Access, Channelization protocols)

2.3
 Error Detection
and
Correction

10.4
 Note

Data can be corrupted

during transmission.

Some applications require that

errors be detected and corrected.

Audio or Video - tolerable?

Text?

10.5
 10-1 INTRODUCTION

Let us first discuss some issues related, directly or

indirectly, to error detection and correction.

Topics discussed in this section:

Types of Errors
Redundancy
Detection Versus Correction
Forward Error Correction Versus Retransmission
Coding
Modular Arithmetic

10.6
10.7
 When bits flow from one point to another,
Subject to interference (unpredictable changes)
- Can change the shape of signal
Note

In a single-bit error, only 1 bit in the data

unit has changed.

Serial data transmission

Noise duration to corrupt a bit?
1Mbps , each bit duration?

10.8
 Figure 10.1 Single-bit error

10.9
 Note

A burst error means that 2 or more bits

in the data unit have changed.

10.10
 Figure 10.2 Burst error of length 8

First to last corrupted bit

Not consecutive!

Noise Duration = Longer than 1 bit duration

Data Rate = 1 kbps, Noise = 1/100 s -> 10 bits
1 Mbps , 10,000bits

10.11
 Note

To detect or correct errors, we need to

send extra (redundant) bits with data.

10.12
 Detection & Correction
 Error Detection

 YES/NO Answer
 Single Bit/ Burst??

 Error Correction
 How many bits corrupted?
 Position of corrupted bits?
 No of Errors & Size of Message
 8 bit data Unit
 correct 1 bit error?
 Correct 2 bit errors ? – 28 possibilities
 1000 bits – 10 errors?

2.13
 Forward Error Correction vs
Retransmission
 FEC
 Receiver guess message by using redundant bits
 Works when no of errors is small

 Retransmission
 Receiver detects error occurrence
 Asks sender to retransmit message
 Resending repeated until receiver is OK!

2.14
 Note

Coding Schemes – Block Coding,

Convolution Coding
(Adding Redundant Bits to Actual Bits)

10.15
 Figure 10.3 The structure of encoder and decoder

Relationship between actual bits and redundant bits

Receiver checks these relationship to detect/correct

10.16
 Note

In modulo-N arithmetic, we use only the

integers in the range 0 to N −1, inclusive.

10.17
 Figure 10.4 XORing of two single bits or two words

10.18
 10-2 BLOCK CODING

In block coding, we divide our message into blocks,

each of k bits, called datawords. We add r redundant
bits to each block to make the length n = k + r. The
resulting n-bit blocks are called codewords.
Block Coding – one to one (same data word encoded
always to same code word)
Topics discussed in this section:
Error Detection
Error Correction
Hamming Distance
Minimum Hamming Distance

10.19
 Figure 10.5 Datawords and codewords in block coding

10.20
 Example 10.1

4B/5B block coding scheme,

k = 4 and n = 5.

As we saw, we have 2k = 16 datawords and 2n = 32

codewords.

16 out of 32 codewords are used for message transfer and

the rest are either used for other purposes or unused.

10.21
 Figure 10.6 Process of error detection in block coding

Single Error Detection only

1. Receiver has list of valid code words

2. Original Code word changed to invalid one

10.22
 Note

An error-detecting code can detect

only the types of errors for which it is
designed; other types of errors may
remain undetected.

10.23
 Table 10.1 A code for error detection

10.24
 Example 10.2

Let us assume that k = 2 and n = 3.

Assume the sender encodes the dataword 01 as 011 and

sends it to the receiver. Consider the following cases:

1. The receiver receives 011. It is a valid codeword. The

receiver extracts the dataword 01 from it.

10.25
 Example 10.2 (continued)

2. The codeword is corrupted during transmission, and

111 is received. This is not a valid codeword and is
discarded.

3. The codeword is corrupted during transmission, and

000 is received. This is a valid codeword. The receiver
incorrectly extracts the dataword 00. Two corrupted
bits have made the error undetectable.

10.26
 Figure 10.7 Structure of encoder and decoder in error correction

More redundant bits for error correction needed

10.27
 Table 10.2 A code for error correction (Example 10.3)

10.28
 Example 10.3
Let us add more redundant bits to see if the receiver can
correct an error without knowing what was actually sent.
We add 3 redundant bits to the 2-bit dataword to make
5-bit codewords. Table shows the datawords and
codewords.

Assume the dataword is 01.

The sender creates the codeword 01011.
The codeword is corrupted during transmission, and 01001
is received. First, the receiver finds that the received
codeword is not in the table. This means an error has
occurred. The receiver, assuming that there is only 1 bit
corrupted, uses the following strategy to guess the correct
dataword.
10.29
 Table 10.2 A code for error correction (Example 10.3)

01001

10.30
 Example 10.3 (continued)
1. Comparing the received codeword with the first
codeword in the table (01001 versus 00000), the
receiver decides that the first codeword is not the one
that was sent because there are two different bits.

2. By the same reasoning, the original codeword cannot be

the third or fourth one in the table.

3. The original codeword must be the second one in the

table because this is the only one that differs from the
received codeword by 1 bit. The receiver replaces
01001 with 01011 and consults the table to find the
dataword 01.
10.31
 Error Control Concept

Note

The Hamming distance between two

words is the number of differences
between corresponding bits.

Apply XOR and count number of 1s

10.32
 Example 10.4

Let us find the Hamming distance between two pairs of

words.

1. The Hamming distance d(000, 011) is 2 because

2. The Hamming distance d(10101, 11110) is 3 because

10.33
 Note

The minimum Hamming distance is the

smallest Hamming distance between
all possible pairs in a set of words.

Measurement that is used

for designing a code

10.34
 Table 10.1 A code for error detection

10.35
 Example 10.5

Find the minimum Hamming distance of the coding

scheme in Table 1
Solution
We first find all Hamming distances.

The dmin in this case is 2.

10.36
 Table 10.2 A code for error correction (Example 10.3)

10.37
 Example 10.6

Find the minimum Hamming distance of the coding

scheme in Table 2

Solution
We first find all the Hamming distances.

The dmin in this case is 3.

10.38
 Note

To guarantee the detection of up to s

errors in all cases, the minimum
Hamming distance in a block
code must be dmin = s + 1.

Received codeword not to erroneously mistaken for another code word

10.39
 Example 10.7

The minimum Hamming distance for our first code scheme

(Table 1) is 2.

This code guarantees detection of only a single error.

For example, if the third codeword (101) is sent and one

error occurs, the received codeword does not match any
valid codeword.

If two errors occur, however, the received codeword may

match a valid codeword and the errors are not detected.

10.40
 Table 10.2 A code for error correction (Example 10.3)

10.41
 Example 10.8

Our second block code scheme (Table 2) has dmin = 3.

This code can detect up to two errors. Again, we see that

when any of the valid codewords is sent, two errors create a
codeword which is not in the table of valid codewords. The
receiver cannot be fooled.

However, some combinations of three errors change a

valid codeword to another valid codeword. The receiver
accepts the received codeword and the errors are
undetected.

10.42
 10-3 LINEAR BLOCK CODES

Almost all block codes used today belong to a subset

called linear block codes.

A linear block code is a code in which the exclusive OR

(addition modulo-2) of two valid codewords creates
another valid codeword.
Topics discussed in this section:
Minimum Distance for Linear Block Codes
Some Linear Block Codes

10.43
 Note

In a linear block code, the exclusive OR

(XOR) of any two valid codewords
creates another valid codeword.

10.44
 Table 10.1 A code for error detection

10.45
 Example 10.10

Let us see if the two codes we defined in Table 10.1 and

Table 10.2 belong to the class of linear block codes.

1. The scheme in Table 1 is a linear block code

because the result of XORing any codeword with any
other codeword is a valid codeword. For example, the
XORing of the second and third codewords creates the
fourth one.

2. The scheme in Table 2 is also a linear block code.

We can create all four codewords by XORing two
other codewords.
10.46
 Table 10.2 A code for error correction (Example 10.3)

10.47
 Example 10.11

In our first code (Table 1), the numbers of 1s in the

nonzero codewords are 2, 2, and 2. So the minimum
Hamming distance is dmin = 2.

In our second code (Table 2), the numbers of 1s in the

nonzero codewords are 3, 3, and 4. So in this code we have
dmin = 3.

10.48
 10-4 CYCLIC CODES

Cyclic codes are special linear block codes with one

extra property. In a cyclic code, if a codeword is
cyclically shifted (rotated), the result is another
codeword.

Topics discussed in this section:

Cyclic Redundancy Check
Polynomials

10.49
 Table 10.6 A CRC code with C(7, 4)

10.50
 Dataword – k bits
Codeword – n bits

Size of dataword is augmented

by adding (n-k) 0’s to right

n-bit result fed to generator

Generator uses divisor

(n-k+1) size predefined and agreed upon

10.51 Append reminder to dataword

 Figure 10.14 CRC encoder and decoder

10.52
 Table 10.6 A CRC code with C(7, 4)

10.53
 Dataword – 1001
Agreed upon Divisor = 1011

10.54
 Figure 10.15 Division in CRC encoder

10.55
 Received Codeword – 1000
Agreed upon Divisor = 1101

10.56
 Figure 10.16 Division in the CRC decoder for two cases

10.57
 Figure 10.21 A polynomial to represent a binary word

Power of each term – position of bit

Coefficient – value of bit

Degree of polynomial = 1 less than no of bits

10.58
 Dataword – 1001
Agreed upon Divisor = 1011
Shifting the polynomial to left
- multiplying each term by xm

10.59
 Figure 10.22 CRC division using polynomials

10.60
 Note

The divisor in a cyclic code is normally

called the generator polynomial
or simply the generator.

10.61
 Dataword – d(x)
Codeword – c(x)
Generator – g(x)
Syndrome – s(x)
Error – e(x)

10.62
10.63
 Note

In a cyclic code,
If s(x) ≠ 0, one or more bits is corrupted.
If s(x) = 0, either

a. No bit is corrupted. or
b. Some bits are corrupted, but the
decoder failed to detect them.

10.64
 Note

In a cyclic code, those e(x) errors that

are divisible by g(x) are not caught.

Received code word = sum of code word and

Error

e(x) is 0 or e(x) is divisible by g(x)

10.65
 How to catch Single-bit Error?

g(x) to detect?

10.66
 How to catch Single-bit Error?

g(x) to detect?

e(x) = xi (i = position)

xi should not be divisible

by g(x)

10.67
 Note

If the generator has more than one term

and the coefficient of x0 is 1,
all single errors can be caught.

10.68
 Example 10.15
Which of the following g(x) values guarantees
that a single-bit error is caught? For each case,
what is the error that cannot be caught?
a. x + 1 b. x3 c. 1
 Example 10.15
Which of the following g(x) values guarantees
that a single-bit error is caught? For each case,
what is the error that cannot be caught?
a. x + 1 b. x3 c. 1
 Figure 10.23 Representation of two isolated single-bit errors using polynomials

Distance bet errors

10.71
 Figure 10.23 Representation of two isolated single-bit errors using polynomials

Distance bet errors

e(x) = xj+xi = xi(xj-i+1)

10.72
 Note

If a generator cannot divide xt + 1

(t between 0 and n – 1),
then all isolated double errors
can be detected.

10.73
 Example 10.16

Find the status of the following generators related to

two isolated, single-bit errors.
a. x + 1

b. x4 + 1

c. x7 + x6 + 1

d. x15 + x14 + 1

10.74
 Example 10.16

Find the status of the following generators related to

two isolated, single-bit errors.
a. x + 1 b. x4 + 1 c. x7 + x6 + 1 d. x15 + x14 + 1
Solution
a. This is a very poor choice for a generator. Any two
errors next to each other cannot be detected.
b. This generator cannot detect two errors that are four
positions apart.
c. This is a good choice for this purpose.
d. This polynomial cannot divide xt + 1 if t is less than
32,768. A codeword with two isolated errors up to
32,768 bits apart can be detected by this generator.
10.75
 Note

A generator that contains a factor of

x + 1 can detect all odd-numbered
errors.

x4 + x2+ x + 1 = (x+1)(x3+ x2+ 1)

10.76
 Burst Error

How to represent?

10.77
10.78
10.79
 Burst Error

e(x) = xj+………+ xi = xi(xj-i+…..+1)

Worry about the generators that divide

(xj-i+…..+1)

Remainder of xj-i+…..+1 / xr+…..+1 must

Not be zero.

10.80
 3 cases

 If j-i < r

 If j-i = r

 If j-i > r

 Length of Burst (L) can be < r , = r , r+1, > r

10.81
 ❏ if j-i < r , the remainder can never be 0

Let’s write j-i = L-1

L – Length of error
L-1 < r
L<r+1
Or
L<r
All Burst Errors with length < number of
check bits r will be detected.
10.82
 ❏ if j-i =r, or
L = r+1
Syndrome is 0 and undetected
Probability of undetected burst error
of length r+1 is (1/2)r-1

Ex : x14+x3+1 , r=14
A burst error of length 15 can slip undetected
with probability of (1/2)14-1 or 1 in 10,000
10.83
 Burst Error of Length r+1
 Error Polynomial will be of degree r
 G(x) will completely divide e(x) only if e(x)
match G(x) term by term

10.84
 Burst Error of Length > r+1

10.85
 Note

❏ All burst errors with L ≤ r will be

detected.
❏ All burst errors with L = r + 1 will be
detected with probability 1 – (1/2)r–1.
❏ All burst errors with L > r + 1 will be
detected with probability 1 – (1/2)r.

10.86
 Example 10.17

Find the suitability of the following generators in

relation to burst errors of different lengths.
a.x6 + 1

b. x18 + x7 + x + 1

c.x32 + x23 + x7 + 1

10.87
 Example 10.17

Find the suitability of the following generators in

relation to burst errors of different lengths.
a. x6 + 1 b. x18 + x7 + x + 1 c. x32 + x23 + x7 + 1

Solution
a. This generator can detect all burst errors with a length
less than or equal to 6 bits; 3 out of 100 burst errors
with length 7 will slip by; 16 out of 1000 burst errors of
length 8 or more will slip by.

10.88
 Example 10.17 (continued)

b. This generator can detect all burst errors with a length

less than or equal to 18 bits; 8 out of 1 million burst
errors with length 19 will slip by; 4 out of 1 million
burst errors of length 20 or more will slip by.

c. This generator can detect all burst errors with a length

less than or equal to 32 bits; 5 out of 10 billion burst
errors with length 33 will slip by; 3 out of 10 billion
burst errors of length 34 or more will slip by.

10.89
 Note

A good polynomial generator needs to

have the following characteristics:
1. It should have at least two terms.
2. The coefficient of the term x0 should
be 1.
3. It should not divide xt + 1, for t
between 2 and n − 1.
4. It should have the factor x + 1.

10.90
 Table 10.7 Standard polynomials

10.91
 10-5 CHECKSUM

Another Error Detection Mechanism.

The checksum is used in the Internet by several

protocols although not at the data link layer.

Topics discussed in this section:

Idea
One’s Complement
Internet Checksum

10.92
 Example 10.18

Suppose our data is a list of five 4-bit numbers that we

want to send to a destination.
In addition to sending these numbers, we send the sum of
the numbers. For example, if the set of numbers is (7, 11,
12, 0, 6),
we send (7, 11, 12, 0, 6, 36), where 36 is the sum of the
original numbers.
The receiver adds the five numbers and compares the result
with the sum. If the two are the same, the receiver assumes
no error, accepts the five numbers, and discards the sum.
Otherwise, there is an error somewhere and the data are not
accepted.
10.93
 Example 10.19

We can make the job of the receiver easier if we send the

negative (complement) of the sum, called the checksum. In
this case, we send (7, 11, 12, 0, 6, −36). The receiver can
add all the numbers received (including the checksum). If
the result is 0, it assumes no error; otherwise, there is an
error.

10.94
 Example 10.22

Let us redo Exercise 10.19 using one’s complement

arithmetic. Figure 10.24 shows the process at the sender
and at the receiver. The sender initializes the checksum to
0 and adds all data items and the checksum (the checksum
is considered as one data item and is shown in color). The
result is 36. However, 36 cannot be expressed in 4 bits.
The extra two bits are wrapped and added with the sum to
create the wrapped sum value 6. In the figure, we have
shown the details in binary. The sum is then
complemented, resulting in the checksum value 9 (15 − 6
= 9). The sender now sends six data items to the receiver
including the checksum 9.
10.95
 Figure 10.24 Example 10.22

10.96
 Example 10.22 (continued)

The receiver follows the same procedure as the sender.

It adds all data items (including the checksum);

the result is 45.
The sum is wrapped and becomes 15.
The wrapped sum is complemented and becomes 0.

Since the value of the checksum is 0, this means that the

data is not corrupted.
The receiver drops the checksum and keeps the other data
items. If the checksum is not zero, the entire packet is
dropped.
10.97
 Internet Checksum

10.98
McGraw-Hill ©The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 2000
 Note

Sender site:
1. The message is divided into 16-bit words.
2. The value of the checksum word is set to 0.
3. All words including the checksum are
added using one’s complement addition.
4. The sum is complemented and becomes the
checksum.
5. The checksum is sent with the data.

10.99
 Note

Receiver site:
1. The message (including checksum) is
divided into 16-bit words.
2. All words are added using one’s
complement addition.
3. The sum is complemented and becomes the
new checksum.
4. If the value of checksum is 0, the message
is accepted; otherwise, it is rejected.

10.100
 Example 10.23

Let us calculate the checksum for a text of 8 characters

(“Forouzan”). The text needs to be divided into 2-byte (16-
bit) words. We use ASCII (see Appendix A) to change
each byte to a 2-digit hexadecimal number. For example, F
is represented as 0x46 and o is represented as 0x6F. Figure
10.25 shows how the checksum is calculated at the sender
and receiver sites. In part a of the figure, the value of
partial sum for the first column is 0x36. We keep the
rightmost digit (6) and insert the leftmost digit (3) as the
carry in the second column. The process is repeated for
each column. Note that if there is any corruption, the
checksum recalculated by the receiver is not all 0s. We
leave this an exercise.
10.101
10.102
 Figure 10.25 Example 10.23

FFFF

10.103
10.104
 Figure 10.8 Geometric concept for finding dmin in error detection

Valid code words outside

received circle

sent

Received code word

cannot be erroneously
mistaken for another
Code word if dist s+1

10.105
 Figure 10.9 Geometric concept for finding dmin in error correction

Each valid code word has its own territory. Rx need to decide
Valid code word

If receiver code word belongs to territory, original code word is one at center.
Overlapping circles?

10.106
 Note

To guarantee correction of up to t errors

in all cases, the minimum Hamming
distance in a block code
must be dmin = 2t + 1.

10.107
 Example 10.9

A code scheme has a Hamming distance dmin = 4. What is

the error detection and correction capability of this
scheme?

Solution
This code guarantees the detection of up to three errors
(s = 3), but it can correct up to one error. In other words,
if this code is used for error correction, part of its capability
is wasted.

Error correction codes need to have an odd minimum

distance (3, 5, 7, . . . ).
10.108
 Note

A simple parity-check code is a

single-bit error-detecting
code in which
n = k + 1 with dmin = 2.

10.109
 Table 10.3 Simple parity-check code C(5, 4)

10.110
 Figure 10.10 Encoder and decoder for simple parity-check code

1 bit Syndrome

10.111
 Example 10.12

Let us look at some transmission scenarios. Assume the

sender sends the dataword 1011. The codeword created
from this dataword is 10111, which is sent to the receiver.
We examine five cases:

1. No error occurs; the received codeword is 10111. The

syndrome is 0. The dataword 1011 is created.
2. One single-bit error changes a1 . The received
codeword is 10011. The syndrome is 1. No dataword
is created.
3. One single-bit error changes r0 . The received codeword
is 10110. The syndrome is 1. No dataword is created.
10.112
 Example 10.12 (continued)

4. An error changes r0 and a second error changes a3 .

The received codeword is 00110. The syndrome is 0.
The dataword 0011 is created at the receiver. Note that
here the dataword is wrongly created due to the
syndrome value.

5. Three bits—a3, a2, and a1—are changed by errors.

The received codeword is 01011. The syndrome is 1.
The dataword is not created. This shows that the simple
parity check, guaranteed to detect one single error, can
also find any odd number of errors.

10.113
 Note

A simple parity-check code can detect

an odd number of errors.

10.114
 Note

All Hamming codes focused here have

dmin = 3.

The relationship between m and n in

these codes is n = 2m − 1.

Number of check bits r = m

Choose an integer m>=3, k = n-m
10.115
 Table 10.4 Hamming code C(7, 4)

10.116
 Figure 10.12 The structure of the encoder and decoder for a Hamming code

10.117
 3 bit syndrome – eight patterns
Lack of error/ error in 1 of 7 bits

Table 10.5 Logical decision made by the correction logic analyzer

q0 is in error – s0 is affected
b2 in error – s0 & s1 affected

10.118
 Example 10.13

Let us trace the path of three datawords from the sender to

the destination:
1. The dataword 0100 becomes the codeword 0100011.
The codeword 0100011 is received. The syndrome is
000, the final dataword is 0100.
2. The dataword 0111 becomes the codeword 0111001.
Codeword 0011001 is received/ The syndrome is 011.
After flipping b2 (changing the 1to 0), the final
dataword is 0111.
3. The dataword 1101 becomes the codeword 1101000.
00010000 is received. The syndrome is 101.
After flipping b0, we get 0000, the wrong dataword. This
shows that our code cannot correct two errors.
10.119
 Example 10.14

We need a dataword of at least 7 bits. Calculate values

of k and n that satisfy this requirement.
Solution
We need to make k = n − m greater than or equal to 7, or
2m − 1 − m ≥ 7.
1. If we set m = 3, the result is n = 23 − 1 and k = 7 − 3,
or 4, which is not acceptable.
2. If we set m = 4, then n = 24 − 1 = 15 and k = 15 − 4 =
11, which satisfies the condition. So the code is
C(15, 11)

10.120
 Figure 10.11 Two-dimensional parity-check code

Dataword organized in table. 7-bit bytes put in separate rows.

Each row/column – 1 parity check bit. Send whole table

To Rx. Syndrome calculated for each row/column
2D parity check – can detect upto 3 errors .
10.121
 Figure 10.11 Two-dimensional parity-check code

Worst cases

Guarantee correction upto 1 error

10.122
 Figure 10.11 Two-dimensional parity-check code

Guarantee?

10.123
 Split Burst error between several codewords, 1 error for each
Figure 10.13 Burst error correction using Hamming code
Only 1 bit in each code

Is corrupted

Hamming code to respond to burst error

Arrange codewords Of size N, make N codewords of frame
Send column by column

10.124