Hubbry Logo
Data linkData linkMain
Open search
Data link
Community hub
Data link
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Data link
Data link
Data link
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

A data link is a means of connecting one location to another for the purpose of transmitting and receiving digital information (data communication). It can also refer to a set of electronics assemblies, consisting of a transmitter and a receiver (two pieces of data terminal equipment) and the interconnecting data telecommunication circuit. These are governed by a link protocol enabling digital data to be transferred from a data source to a data sink.

Types

[edit]

There are at least three types of basic data-link configurations that can be conceived of and used:

Aviation

[edit]

In civil aviation, a data-link system (known as Controller Pilot Data Link Communications) is used to send information between aircraft and air traffic controllers for example when an aircraft is too far from the ATC to make voice radio communication and radar observations possible. Such systems are used for aircraft crossing the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian oceans. One such system, used by Nav Canada and NATS over the North Atlantic, uses a five-digit data link sequence number confirmed between air traffic control and the pilots of the aircraft before the aircraft proceeds to cross the ocean. This system uses the aircraft's flight management computer to send location, speed and altitude information about the aircraft to the ATC. ATC can then send messages to the aircraft regarding any necessary change of course.

In unmanned aircraft, land vehicles, boats, and spacecraft, a two-way (full-duplex or half-duplex) data-link is used to send control signals, and to receive telemetry.

See also

[edit]

Sources

[edit]
  • Public Domain This article incorporates public domain material from Federal Standard 1037C. General Services Administration. Archived from the original on 2022-01-22. (in support of MIL-STD-188).
  • Public Domain This article incorporates public domain material from Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms. United States Department of Defense.
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Data link

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
A data link is a means of connecting one location to another for the purpose of transmitting and receiving digital information. It encompasses the communications channel, the interface, and the protocols used to form data into frames or packets for reliable transfer between directly connected nodes. In the Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) reference model, the data link layer (layer 2) provides the functional and procedural means to manage this transfer between adjacent network entities, detecting and possibly correcting errors that occur in the physical layer. It facilitates node-to-node delivery of data over a single communication channel, ensuring reliable and efficient communication between devices, such as those on a local area network (LAN). This layer receives data units from the network layer above and transforms them into frames suitable for transmission across the physical medium below, handling tasks like framing, synchronization, and medium access control. Key functions of the data link layer include where implemented) to maintain , flow control to manage the rate of data transmission and prevent overwhelming the receiver, and addressing to identify specific devices. It supports both connection-oriented and connectionless modes of operation, allowing for the establishment, maintenance, and release of data-link connections when needed. In shared network environments, the layer employs protocols for to resolve contention among multiple devices attempting to transmit simultaneously, such as through carrier sense multiple access with collision detection (CSMA/CD). In the standards family, which implements aspects of the data link for LANs and metropolitan area networks (MANs), the layer is divided into two sublayers: the (LLC) sublayer, which provides and flow/error control services to the network layer, and the (MAC) sublayer, which manages access to the physical and handles framing specific to the network type. Prominent protocols operating at this layer include for wired LANs, which uses MAC addresses for device identification and supports frame transmission up to 1500 bytes in standard frames; for wireless networks, incorporating additional security and contention resolution mechanisms; (PPP) for direct connections like dial-up or serial links; and (HDLC) for synchronous data transfer in wide area networks. These protocols ensure interoperability across diverse physical media, from twisted-pair copper to and radio waves, forming the foundation for reliable local and point-to-point networking.

Overview

Definition

In the Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) model, the data link layer is defined as the second layer (Layer 2), which provides the functional and procedural means to transfer data between adjacent network nodes in a multipoint or point-to-point data communications network. This layer is responsible for the node-to-node delivery of data frames between directly connected devices, ensuring that data is reliably exchanged across a single physical link. Unlike the physical layer (Layer 1), which deals with the raw transmission of individual bits over a physical medium without regard to their meaning or structure, the data link layer organizes these bits into structured frames, adding necessary headers and trailers to enable proper interpretation and delivery. Key characteristics of the include providing reliability over potentially unreliable physical media by incorporating mechanisms for on a hop-by-hop basis, rather than end-to-end. It employs addressing through Media Access Control (MAC) addresses, which are unique hardware identifiers assigned to network interfaces, to specify the source and destination of frames within a local . This hop-by-hop approach allows the data link layer to manage transmission errors and retransmissions locally between directly connected nodes, abstracting the complexities of the physical medium from higher layers. The basic components of a data link include (transmitting node), the receiver (receiving node), the physical medium (such as cable or channel) connecting them, and the protocol rules governing frame exchange, , and acknowledgment processes. These elements work together to establish a logical that supports efficient and ordered transfer, forming the foundation for higher-layer networking functions.

Historical Development

The concept of the data link layer emerged in the 1960s through projects like the , funded by the U.S. Department of Defense's Advanced Research Projects Agency (), where data links provided the foundational mechanisms for reliable across early network nodes. The 's initial deployment in 1969 connected four host computers, enabling the transmission of data packets over telephone lines between institutions such as UCLA and the Stanford Research Institute, marking the first operational packet-switched network that relied on data link protocols for error-free delivery between adjacent nodes. In the 1970s, efforts toward standardization accelerated with the development of (HDLC) by the (ISO), proposed as a bit-oriented synchronous protocol to unify transmission procedures across diverse systems. HDLC, evolving from IBM's Synchronous Data Link Control (SDLC) and formalized in ISO standards like ISO 3309 in 1979, became a for bit-synchronous communication in both point-to-point and multipoint configurations, influencing subsequent protocols for reliable link-level operations. The 1980s and 1990s saw significant advancements tailored to local and wide area networks, including the rise of standardized as in 1983, which defined with (CSMA/CD) for shared-medium LANs operating at 10 Mbps. Complementing this, the (PPP) emerged in the late 1980s as a successor to the (SLIP), with RFC 1134 published in 1989 and the full standard in RFC 1661 by 1994, enabling robust serial connections for WANs with features like authentication and multilink support. From the 2000s onward, data link technologies integrated with wireless and high-speed wired standards, such as (Wi-Fi), which saw amendments like 802.11g in 2003 for 54 Mbps operation at 2.4 GHz, driving widespread adoption in consumer and enterprise networks. Concurrently, (10GBASE) was ratified under IEEE 802.3ae in 2002, extending Ethernet's scalability to fiber-optic backbones at 10 Gbps for data centers and metropolitan networks. Later developments include 400 Gigabit Ethernet under IEEE 802.3bs in 2017, supporting ultra-high-speed links up to 400 Gbps over for data centers, as well as (IEEE 802.11ax) ratified in 2020 for improved efficiency in dense environments and Wi-Fi 7 (IEEE 802.11be) published in 2025, enabling multi-gigabit wireless speeds across 2.4, 5, and 6 GHz bands. These evolutions were bolstered by regulatory bodies like the Telecommunication Standardization Sector () and the IEEE, which developed complementary standards—such as ITU-T's X-series for data networks and IEEE's 802 family—to ensure global interoperability and harmonized link-layer behaviors across infrastructures.

Functions

Framing and Synchronization

In the data link layer, framing involves encapsulating packets from the into structured frames suitable for transmission over a physical medium. This process adds a header containing addressing and control information, the consisting of the original network layer data, and a trailer typically including a for integrity verification. The header enables the receiver to identify the destination and manage frame handling, while the trailer supports basic checking, as detailed further in the error detection section. This encapsulation ensures reliable delivery across the link by delineating the boundaries of each unit of data. A generic data link frame structure typically includes start and end flags to mark the frame boundaries, a length field to indicate the payload size, and sequence numbers to maintain order in multi-frame transmissions. For instance, the start flag is often a specific bit pattern like 01111110 in bit-oriented protocols, followed by the header, , and end flag, with the trailer appended last. This format allows for variable-length payloads, accommodating up to the (MTU) limits defined by the underlying technology, such as 1500 bytes in standard Ethernet frames per specifications. Sequence numbers help in reassembling frames correctly, especially in scenarios involving retransmissions. Synchronization techniques are essential to distinguish control information from payload data and maintain timing during transmission. In synchronous protocols like (HDLC), is employed: after every five consecutive 1s in the data, a 0 is inserted by the sender to prevent accidental flag emulation, and the receiver removes it upon detection. This method, standardized in ISO/IEC 13239, ensures transparent data transmission without misinterpreting payload bits as delimiters. For asynchronous links, character stuffing (or byte stuffing) is used, where an precedes any data byte matching the flag or escape pattern, as seen in protocols operating over octet-oriented channels. These approaches address key challenges, such as reliably separating data from control signals in noisy environments and handling variable payloads without exceeding link MTU constraints, thereby preventing frame fragmentation or loss.

Error Detection and Control

Transmission errors at the data link layer primarily originate from noise, interference, or signal distortion occurring on the physical medium, which can alter bits during propagation and lead to corrupted frames. These impairments introduce random bit flips or burst errors, necessitating robust mechanisms to ensure data integrity without relying on higher-layer interventions. Error detection techniques append redundant bits to the data for verification. The simplest method employs parity bits, where an additional bit is added to achieve even or odd parity across the data block; this detects odd numbers of bit errors, such as single-bit flips, but fails for even-numbered errors. For enhanced reliability, Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC) uses polynomial division over the data treated as a large binary number. A common implementation is CRC-32, defined by the polynomial x32+x26+x23+x22+x16+x12+x11+x10+x8+x7+x5+x4+x2+x+1x^{32} + x^{26} + x^{23} + x^{22} + x^{16} + x^{12} + x^{11} + x^{10} + x^{8} + x^{7} + x^{5} + x^{4} + x^{2} + x + 1, which generates a 32-bit checksum appended to the frame (typically in the trailer for post-framing integrity checks). This approach detects all burst errors up to 32 bits in length and multiple independent errors with high probability. Upon detecting an error, control strategies trigger recovery. Automatic Repeat reQuest (ARQ) protocols rely on acknowledgments (ACKs) from the receiver to confirm successful reception, prompting retransmission of erroneous frames. In Stop-and-Wait ARQ, the sender transmits one frame and awaits an ACK before sending the next, minimizing complexity but reducing efficiency due to idle waiting periods. Go-Back-N ARQ improves throughput by allowing the sender to transmit up to N unacknowledged frames in a window; if an error occurs, all frames from the errored one onward are retransmitted, requiring the receiver to discard out-of-order arrivals. These methods ensure reliable delivery at the cost of potential delays. For scenarios where retransmissions are undesirable, such as real-time links, enables direct correction without feedback. Hamming codes exemplify this by organizing parity bits to identify and fix single-bit errors through syndrome calculation. In the (7,4) Hamming code, 4 data bits are augmented with 3 parity bits across 7 positions (parity at powers of 2: 1, 2, 4), where each parity bit checks a unique subset of positions via a parity-check matrix; the syndrome reveals the error position for correction. Key trade-offs in these mechanisms balance detection accuracy against overhead. Parity bits introduce minimal (1-bit) redundancy but offer limited protection, while CRC provides superior burst error detection up to the degree at the expense of 32 bits per frame, impacting bandwidth efficiency in high-error environments. ARQ and FEC further trade latency and complexity for reliability, with ARQ suiting variable channels and FEC favoring low-latency applications. Flow control in the data link layer ensures efficient data transmission by regulating the rate at which frames are sent and received, preventing buffer overflows and optimizing link utilization. A key mechanism is the , which allows a sender to transmit multiple frames without waiting for individual acknowledgments, up to a predefined window size W that represents the number of unacknowledged frames permitted. In this approach, each frame is assigned a sequence number modulo some value, and the receiver sends cumulative acknowledgments to advance the window, enabling pipelined transmission over unreliable links. Receivers can advertise available buffer space through window scaling options, dynamically adjusting W to match capacity and avoid congestion. Link management encompasses the processes of establishing, maintaining, and terminating data link connections to ensure reliable communication. Establishment typically involves a using control packets, such as in the (PPP), where the Link Control Protocol (LCP) negotiates configuration options like maximum receive unit (MRU) and compression via Configure-Request, Configure-Ack, Configure-Nak, and Configure-Reject packets during the Link Establishment phase. Once established, maintenance is achieved through periodic packets or echo requests to monitor link quality and detect failures, with LCP providing ongoing configuration integrity checks. Teardown occurs via Terminate-Request and Terminate-Ack packets, triggered by errors, timeouts (default restart timer of 3 seconds), or administrative actions, closing the link gracefully. Congestion avoidance at the mitigates overload by signaling backpressure to upstream devices, particularly in full-duplex environments. In Ethernet, IEEE 802.3x defines pause frames as a flow control mechanism, where a receiving device detects buffer congestion and transmits a MAC control frame with a pause_time (in slot times) to instruct the sender to halt transmission for the specified duration, preventing frame loss without higher-layer intervention. These frames use a destination (01-80-C2-00-00-01) and 0x0001, and can be extended or canceled by subsequent pause frames, applying symmetrically in switch-to-switch links or asymmetrically for end stations. This link-level approach operates at speeds like 10/100/1000 Mb/s but is not intended for end-to-end congestion control. Data link operations distinguish between half-duplex and full-duplex modes, impacting management strategies. In half-duplex shared media, (CSMA/CD) manages access by having stations listen before transmitting and detect collisions, backing off exponentially if conflicts occur, as specified in for shared collision domains. Full-duplex mode, enabled by dedicated point-to-point links and switching, eliminates collisions by allowing simultaneous send and receive without CSMA/CD, simplifying management and doubling effective throughput in modern Ethernet implementations. Key performance metrics for evaluating flow and link management include throughput and goodput, which quantify data transfer efficiency. Throughput measures the total rate of bits transmitted per second across the link, encompassing all data including protocol overhead and retransmissions due to errors. , in contrast, represents the rate of useful data successfully delivered after deducting overhead (e.g., Ethernet headers) and accounting for losses, always lower than throughput and critical for assessing actual application performance in the presence of data link inefficiencies.

Types

A point-to-point link establishes a direct, dedicated communication path between exactly two nodes, utilizing an exclusive that precludes interference or contention from additional devices. This configuration ensures that the entire bandwidth is reserved for the communicating pair, whether over wired connections like serial cables or leased lines, or mediums in certain implementations. The primary advantages of point-to-point links include simplified protocol design, as there is no need for mechanisms to manage shared resources; enhanced reliability through consistent, uncontended access to bandwidth; and standard support for full-duplex operation, which permits simultaneous transmission and reception of data in both directions without collision risks. These attributes make point-to-point links particularly suitable for applications requiring predictable performance and security, such as private data transfers between sites. Representative examples include the standard, which facilitates short-distance up to 15 meters at speeds of 20 kbps, commonly used for connecting computers to peripherals. In telephony, T1 lines provide dedicated point-to-point connectivity at 1.544 Mbps in , while E1 lines offer 2.048 Mbps in and other regions, both aggregating multiple voice or data channels over copper or fiber. Point-to-point links operate in either synchronous or asynchronous modes. Synchronous configurations, such as (Synchronous Optical Networking), employ a shared to align data transmission, enabling high-speed, precise multiplexing of bit streams over for backbone networks. In contrast, asynchronous setups, exemplified by (Universal Asynchronous Receiver-Transmitter), use start and stop bits to frame data without a common clock, suiting simpler, lower-speed serial interfaces. The (PPP) is well-suited for encapsulating data over such links due to its support for various . Common use cases encompass (WAN) connections, including legacy dial-up modems that establish temporary point-to-point sessions over telephone lines for remote access, and modern fiber optic point-to-point deployments that deliver high-bandwidth, private links between data centers or branch offices. Multipoint links refer to data link configurations where three or more nodes share a common , necessitating coordinated access mechanisms to prevent simultaneous transmissions that could lead to collisions. Unlike point-to-point links, these setups treat the medium as a broadcast channel accessible by multiple stations, enabling efficient sharing but requiring arbitration to maintain orderly communication. Common implementations include bus topologies, where all devices connect to a single backbone cable acting as a shared multipoint medium, and ring topologies, which form a closed loop of serial point-to-point connections that logically create a shared circulating path for data. Access methods in multipoint links primarily rely on protocols that regulate medium usage to avoid conflicts. , as exemplified in the IEEE 802.5 standard, involves a special control frame (token) that circulates the ring; a station seizes the token to transmit, appending its data frame before releasing a new token only after the frame returns, ensuring deterministic access without collisions. In contrast, (CSMA) variants, such as CSMA/CD used in Ethernet networks, allow stations to sense the medium for idleness before transmitting; if a collision is detected during transmission, stations issue a jam signal and employ a truncated binary algorithm to retry after random delays. Star topologies implemented with hubs (legacy multiport repeaters) also function as multipoint equivalents by centralizing connections to create a shared , while wireless ad-hoc networks extend this concept to radio-based shared media. Key challenges in multipoint links include collision detection and the hidden terminal problem, particularly in wireless environments where nodes may not detect each other's transmissions due to signal range limitations, leading to interference at the intended receiver. To mitigate the hidden terminal issue, the IEEE 802.11 standard incorporates the Request-to-Send/Clear-to-Send (RTS/CTS) mechanism, a four-way handshake where the sender broadcasts an RTS frame to reserve the medium, the receiver responds with CTS to acknowledge and silence nearby nodes, and transmission proceeds only upon mutual confirmation, reducing collision probability through virtual carrier sensing. Bandwidth sharing in these links contrasts deterministic approaches like Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA), which allocates fixed time slots to nodes for guaranteed access, with statistical multiplexing, which dynamically assigns resources based on traffic demand to achieve higher efficiency in variable-load scenarios.

Protocols

Data link layer protocols establish reliable communication over physical links by defining frame structures, error handling, and control mechanisms. Synchronous protocols, such as (HDLC), operate on a bit-oriented basis, using flags for framing to delineate data boundaries in continuous bit streams. HDLC supports (ARQ) for error recovery, enabling retransmission of corrupted frames in connection-oriented modes. A key derivative, Synchronous Data Link Control (SDLC), was developed by for its , adapting HDLC principles for proprietary environments while maintaining bit-oriented synchronization. Asynchronous protocols, in contrast, employ byte-oriented framing to accommodate variable-speed links without strict clocking. The (PPP), standardized by the IETF, uses character stuffing for transparency and includes the Link Control Protocol (LCP) to negotiate parameters like maximum receive unit and authentication methods, such as (CHAP). PPP's predecessor, (SLIP), provided basic IP encapsulation over serial lines but lacked negotiation and error detection features, limiting its robustness. In protocol stack integration, the (LLC) sublayer, defined in , enables multiplexing of multiple network protocols over a single Media Access Control (MAC) sublayer by assigning service access points for demultiplexing incoming frames. This separation allows upper-layer protocols to interact uniformly with diverse MAC implementations, such as those in local area networks. Standardization efforts are led by bodies like the IETF for wide-area network (WAN) protocols, exemplified by RFC 1661 for PPP, which outlines encapsulation and link establishment procedures. The ITU-T standardizes protocols like Link Access Procedure, Balanced (LAPB) for X.25 networks, providing balanced mode operations for error-free frame delivery in packet-switched environments. The evolution of these protocols has shifted from bit-synchronous designs, like early HDLC variants requiring precise clock alignment, to byte-oriented approaches in protocols such as PPP, offering greater flexibility for integration with IP-based networks through simpler asynchronous handling and extensible options.

Common Implementations

Ethernet, standardized as IEEE 802.3, serves as a foundational wired data link technology for local area networks (LANs). Its frame format begins with an 8-byte preamble consisting of seven alternating 1s and 0s followed by a start frame delimiter (SFD) byte of 10101011, enabling receiver synchronization. This is followed by 6-byte destination and source MAC addresses, a 2-byte length or type field indicating payload size or upper-layer protocol, the variable-length data payload (up to 1500 bytes in standard frames), and a 4-byte frame check sequence (FCS) using CRC-32 for error detection. Speeds have evolved from the original 10 Mbps in 1983 to modern variants reaching 800 Gbps (as of 2025). Originally employing carrier sense multiple access with collision detection (CSMA/CD) for half-duplex shared media, Ethernet now predominantly uses full-duplex operation over switched networks, eliminating collisions and enabling simultaneous bidirectional transmission. Wi-Fi, governed by the family of standards, provides wireless data link connectivity in personal and enterprise environments. The (MAC) layer defines three primary frame types: data frames for payload transmission, control frames such as acknowledgments and request-to-send/clear-to-send for channel coordination, and management frames for association, , and beaconing to maintain . Contention-based access occurs through the (DCF), which implements with collision avoidance (CSMA/CA), where stations listen before transmitting and use after detected collisions via missing acknowledgments. (QoS) enhancements in IEEE 802.11e introduce the hybrid coordination function (HCF) with enhanced distributed channel access (EDCA), prioritizing traffic classes like voice and video through adjustable contention parameters. Bluetooth, originally formalized in IEEE 802.15.1 but now managed by the Bluetooth SIG (Core Specification 6.2 as of November 2025), enables short-range wireless personal area networks (PANs) with low power consumption. It organizes devices into a topology, where one master coordinates up to seven active slaves using time-division duplexing on the 2.4 GHz ISM band. To mitigate interference, Bluetooth employs adaptive (FHSS), pseudorandomly selecting from 79 channels at 1 MHz spacing and hopping up to 1600 times per second (in Classic mode). Link types include asynchronous connection-less (ACL) for Classic mode supporting up to ~2 Mbps effective and synchronous connection-oriented (SCO/eSCO) for voice links at 64 kbps with reserved bandwidth; Low Energy (LE) mode supports data rates up to 2 Mbps. Fiber Channel, an ANSI-standardized protocol for high-speed storage area networks (SANs), operates at the to interconnect servers, storage devices, and switches. Earlier generations use 8b/10b encoding to ensure DC balance and ; later generations employ 64b/66b or PAM4 encoding, transmitting serialized data over optic or media at rates from 1 Gbps to 128 Gbps in the latest generations. The FC-4 layer provides mapping for upper-layer protocols such as for block storage or IP for networking, encapsulating them into frames for reliable delivery. Common implementations like Ethernet exhibit low latency, typically under 1 ms in switched environments, facilitating real-time applications. Scalability is enhanced by tagging, which partitions networks into up to 4096 virtual LANs, supporting thousands of nodes while maintaining isolation and traffic prioritization.

Applications

Terrestrial Networking

In terrestrial networking, the facilitates reliable communication in ground-based wired and short-range wireless environments, such as local area networks (LANs) in office settings. Ethernet serves as a primary protocol for LAN applications, enabling efficient among connected devices by providing high-speed, collision-free transmission through full-duplex operations. Switches perform bridging functions at the , isolating network segments to reduce and enhance performance by forwarding frames only to intended ports based on MAC addresses. For (WAN) extensions in carrier environments, (MPLS) operates over (SONET) and Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH) infrastructures, allowing efficient transport of data link frames across long distances. MPLS employs label switching at what is often termed Layer 2.5, where labels are attached to packets at the edge and swapped hop-by-hop to forward traffic without relying on headers, thus optimizing bandwidth in core networks. In home networking scenarios, (DSL) modems utilize (PPPoE) for user authentication, encapsulating PPP frames within Ethernet to establish secure sessions with service providers via attributes. Powerline adapters, standardized under , enable data link communication over existing electrical wiring, transmitting broadband signals through home circuits to connect devices without additional cabling while supporting multimedia and smart energy applications. Security in terrestrial data links is bolstered by standards like , which implements port-based to authenticate devices before granting network access, restricting unauthorized traffic at the physical level. Complementing this, MACsec () provides hop-by-hop link encryption, securing Ethernet frames with cryptographic integrity and confidentiality to protect against and tampering in fixed infrastructures. Scalability of data link technologies in terrestrial setups ranges from small workgroups using switches, which deliver 1 Gbps speeds for basic office connectivity with minimal latency, to large-scale data centers employing for low-latency clustering. supports high-bandwidth, lossless interconnects in clustered environments, achieving sub-microsecond latencies essential for tasks.

Aviation and Aerospace

In aviation, data link technologies enable critical communications between aircraft and ground stations, as well as among aircraft, in environments demanding high reliability and minimal voice interference. The Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (), introduced in 1978 by Aeronautical Radio, Incorporated (), serves as a foundational digital data link for transmitting short text messages using VHF (around 130 MHz), HF (2-30 MHz), and satellite links. ACARS supports automated position reporting through integration with Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Contract (ADS-C) and facilitates maintenance data exchange, such as engine performance logs and fault diagnostics, thereby reducing pilot workload and enhancing operational efficiency. Controller-Pilot Data Link Communications (CPDLC) builds on infrastructure to provide structured, text-based exchanges between air traffic controllers and pilots, alleviating voice radio congestion in high-density . Operating over IP-based (ATN) protocols via VHF data link Mode 2 or satellite, CPDLC adheres to 622 standards, which define convergence functions for bit-oriented air traffic services on networks. This system enables clearances, requests, and acknowledgments, such as altitude changes or route amendments, with predefined message sets that minimize miscommunication errors. Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) enhances by broadcasting real-time position, velocity, and identification data derived from GNSS. Utilizing a 1090 MHz extended squitter on Mode S transponders, ADS-B integrates seamlessly with existing systems, allowing continuous transmission without and supporting collision avoidance through direct -to- links. This 1090ES implementation meets FAA performance requirements under Technical Standard Order TSO-C166b, enabling to track more precisely in non-radar areas. In applications, particularly satellite-to-ground links, the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) protocols address unique issues like Doppler shifts and long delays. CCSDS 401.0-B recommends and modulation systems that accommodate Doppler shifts up to ±4 MHz in Ka-band (26-32 GHz) links, using coherent turnaround frequency ratios and stable oscillators (Allan deviation per specified curves) to maintain signal lock during high-velocity passes. These protocols, including PCM/PSK/PM modulation with subcarrier options, ensure reliable and ranging over distances causing delays of seconds to minutes, as seen in deep space missions, by prioritizing phase stability and bandwidth efficiency. Aviation and aerospace data links face stringent challenges, including achieving 99.999% availability to support safety-critical operations and latencies under 1 second for time-sensitive updates. VHF and HF links are susceptible to interference from phenomena like ionospheric disturbances and obstructions, which can degrade signal-to-noise ratios and require robust error control mechanisms for continuity. In space environments, additional hurdles involve compensating for extreme Doppler rates (up to 50 kHz/s in ) and propagation delays exceeding 500 ms one-way, necessitating adaptive modulation and high oscillator stability to prevent .

Wireless and Mobile Systems

In and mobile systems, data links operate over dynamic channels prone to , interference, and mobility-induced disruptions, necessitating robust framing, error correction, and mechanisms to maintain reliable connectivity. In cellular networks such as LTE and , the air interface relies on the (PDCP) and (RLC) layers at the data link sublayer for these functions. The PDCP layer in LTE handles header compression using Robust Header Compression (ROHC), ciphering, and integrity protection of user plane and data, while passing PDUs to the RLC layer. The RLC layer supports transfer of upper-layer PDUs, segmentation and reassembly for efficient transmission over variable radio conditions, and error correction via (ARQ) in acknowledged mode (AM) to retransmit lost segments, ensuring reliable delivery in the presence of packet errors. In , the PDCP layer extends these capabilities with support for dual connectivity and split bearers, associating each PDCP entity with up to two RLC entities for improved robustness during mobility, while the RLC layer maintains similar segmentation, reassembly, and ARQ functions tailored to NR's flexible . Handover procedures in these systems enable seamless transitions between base stations as mobile devices move, minimizing data interruption. In 5G NR, Dual Active Protocol Stack (DAPS) handover allows the user equipment (UE) to maintain the source base station connection post-handover command, enabling continued uplink transmission from the source and downlink reception until the target link is established, which reduces interruption time to near zero for supported bearers. This contrasts with traditional break-before-make handovers in LTE, where the UE detaches from the source eNodeB before attaching to the target, relying on PDCP status reporting and RLC re-establishment to recover lost packets. WiMAX, based on the IEEE 802.16 standard, addresses broadband wireless access in mobile environments through (OFDM) in the to mitigate multipath and inter-symbol interference, dividing the channel into subcarriers for robust signal over non-line-of-sight paths. At the MAC layer, WiMAX employs connection-oriented scheduling to provision (QoS), classifying traffic into service classes such as unsolicited grant service (UGS) for constant applications and real-time polling service (rtPS) for variable rate streams, with the dynamically allocating bandwidth via (OFDMA) maps to meet latency and throughput guarantees. For low-power (IoT) applications, builds on the standard to form mesh topologies that extend range and reliability in sensor networks through , where devices act as routers to data while conserving energy. The uses with Collision Avoidance (CSMA-CA) in unslotted mode for low-duty-cycle operations, where nodes perform clear channel assessments and random backoffs before transmitting, minimizing collisions and enabling battery lives of years in dense deployments. Mobility management in these systems incorporates association procedures to handle device transitions. In Wi-Fi (IEEE 802.11), initial association establishes a link between a station and access point via authentication and association request/response frames, while reassociation allows a mobile station to transfer its existing association to a new access point without full re-authentication, supporting fast roaming and maintaining context like security keys. In cellular systems, paging mechanisms enhance idle-mode power saving by allowing UEs to enter discontinuous reception (DRX) cycles, monitoring the paging channel only during assigned occasions to detect incoming calls or data, with the network broadcasting paging messages across tracking areas to locate idle UEs without continuous attachment. Interference handling in mobile wireless data links employs frequency reuse patterns and advanced to optimize spectrum efficiency. In 5G mmWave bands, massive directs narrow beams toward users using precoding matrices, suppressing inter-user and inter-cell interference while enabling dense frequency reuse factors close to 1 in urban deployments. This directional transmission, combined with coordinated multipoint (CoMP) techniques, mitigates and blockage in high-mobility scenarios, achieving up to 10-20 dB interference reduction compared to omnidirectional antennas.

References

  1. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/data-link
  2. https://web.cs.wpi.edu/~cs4514/b98/week3-dll/week3-dll.html
  3. https://faculty.sfcc.spokane.edu/Rudlock/files/WP_Simoneau_OSIModel.pdf
  4. https://ala.cs.wmich.edu/Fall09/cs5550/lectures/LinkLayer.pdf
  5. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/802/10894/
  6. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/802.3/10422/
  7. https://users.eecs.northwestern.edu/~rberry/ECE333/Lectures/lec10.pdf
  8. https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/secmail/pdfYD89wBpRqH.pdf
  9. https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/s/article/osi-model-reference-chart
  10. https://www.usna.edu/Users/cs/choi/it430/lec/l04/lec.html
  11. https://learningnetwork.cisco.com/s/question/0D53i00000OmzDfCAJ/osi-model-examples
  12. https://www.ecma-international.org/wp-content/uploads/s020269e.pdf
  13. https://www.internetsociety.org/internet/history-internet/brief-history-internet/
  14. https://www.ual.es/~vruiz/Docencia/Apuntes/Networking/Protocols/Level-2/01-HDLC/index.html
  15. https://www.gl.com/Presentations/HDLC-Protocol-Overview-Presentation.pdf
  16. https://spectrum.ieee.org/ethernet-ieee-milestone
  17. http://www.tcpipguide.com/free/t_PPPOverviewHistoryandBenefits.htm
  18. https://www.broadcom.com/blog/25-years-of-wi-fi
  19. https://standards.ieee.org/beyond-standards/ethernet-50th-anniversary/
  20. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/802.3bs/10208/
  21. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/802.11ax/10605/
  22. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/802.11be/10842/
  23. https://www.itu.int/en/ITU-T/studygroups/com17/ict/Pages/ict-part01.aspx
  24. https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1662.html
  25. https://book.systemsapproach.org/direct/framing.html
  26. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ip/transmission-control-protocol-tcp/200932-Ethernet-MTU-and-TCP-MSS-Adjustment-Conc.pdf
  27. https://www.techtarget.com/searchnetworking/definition/HDLC
  28. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/transmission-error
  29. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1478462.1478474
  30. https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~koopman/networks/dsn02/dsn02_koopman.pdf
  31. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/automatic-repeat-request
  32. https://zoo.cs.yale.edu/classes/cs323/doc/Hamming.pdf
  33. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc3366
  34. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/46512
  35. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1661
  36. https://www.ieee802.org/3/z/public/presentations/nov1996/RS8023x.pdf
  37. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9844436
  38. https://www.ciscopress.com/articles/article.asp?p=3197437&seqNum=2
  39. https://www.pslightwave.com/point-to-point/
  40. https://www.apcsolutionsuk.com/point-to-point-network/
  41. https://www.meter.com/resources/what-is-point-to-point
  42. https://lightyear.ai/blogs/point-to-point-connectivity
  43. https://www.techtarget.com/searchnetworking/definition/full-duplex
  44. https://portal.opengear.com/s/article/Whatsthemaximumserialcablelength661d1ba0c2ca7
  45. https://www.blackbox.com/insights/blackbox-explains/inner/detail/networking/technologies-standards-and-interfaces/t1-and-e1
  46. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/optical/synchronous-optical-network-sonet/13567-sonet-tech-tips.html
  47. https://www.rohde-schwarz.com/us/products/test-and-measurement/essentials-test-equipment/digital-oscilloscopes/understanding-uart_254524.html
  48. https://www.techtarget.com/searchnetworking/definition/PPP
  49. https://www.howtonetwork.com/comptia-network-study-guide-free/wide-area-networks-wan/
  50. https://www.atlantech.net/blog/point-to-point-fiber-optic-network-multiple-locations
  51. https://s.web.umkc.edu/sbs7vc/IT321/Net_Top/Net-Top.html
  52. https://calhoun.nps.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/6efa359e-c61d-4c9b-846a-c356d29332c9/content
  53. https://www.cs.emory.edu/~cheung/Courses/558/Syllabus/00/CSMA/00-Others/ethernet3.htm
  54. https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/3/av/public/2008_04/3av_0804_remein_2.pdf
  55. http://eceweb1.rutgers.edu/~marsic/books/WN/book-WN_marsic.pdf
  56. https://grouper.ieee.org/groups/802/16/sub10/pres/80216sub10p-00_07.pdf
  57. https://www.iso.org/standard/37010.html
  58. https://www.rhyshaden.com/hdlc.htm
  59. https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/computer-networks/difference-between-serial-line-internet-protocol-slip-and-point-to-point-protocol-ppp/
  60. https://standards.ieee.org/wp-content/uploads/import/documents/tutorials/llc.pdf
  61. https://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/11_0/access/configuration/guide/acx25.html
  62. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/802.3df/11292/
  63. https://www.bluetooth.com/specifications/specs/core-specification-6-2/
  64. https://fibrechannel.org/roadmap/
  65. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/ethernet/10561-3.html
  66. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/ethernet/12006-chapter22.html
  67. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc5654/
  68. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/1901/7598/
  69. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/802.1X/7345/
  70. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/802.1AE/7154/
  71. https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/switches/business-110-series-unmanaged-switches/datasheet-c78-744158.html
  72. https://www.infinibandta.org/about-infiniband/
  73. https://catalogimages.wiley.com/images/db/pdf/9781848217416.excerpt.pdf
  74. https://www.faa.gov/documentlibrary/media/advisory_circular/ac_90-117.pdf
  75. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC%252020-140.pdf
  76. https://standards.globalspec.com/std/10178357/arinc-622
  77. https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/avs/060731_PARCDataLinkRoadmapLetter.pdf
  78. https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/AC_90-114C.pdf
  79. https://public.ccsds.org/Pubs/401x0b32.pdf
  80. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9450/
  81. https://www.3gpp.org/dynareport/36323.htm
  82. https://www.3gpp.org/dynareport/36322.htm
  83. https://www.3gpp.org/dynareport/38323.htm
  84. https://www.3gpp.org/dynareport/38322.htm
  85. https://standards.ieee.org/ieee/802.16/6996/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.