![[BACK]](/cvsweb/icons/back.gif){kind=icon}
Return to isode1.tex CVS log ![[TXT]](/cvsweb/icons/text.gif){kind=icon}
![[DIR]](/cvsweb/icons/dir.gif){kind=icon}
Up to [CSRG BSD Unix] / 43BSDReno / contrib / isode-beta / doc / isode1|
Return to isode1.tex CVS log | Up to [CSRG BSD Unix] / 43BSDReno / contrib / isode-beta / doc / isode1 |
1.1 root 1: % -*- LaTeX -*- (really SLiTeX)
2:
3: \documentstyle[blackandwhite,landscape,oval,pagenumbers,small]{NRslides}
4:
5: \font\xx=cmbx10
6: \font\yy=cmbx7
7:
8: \raggedright
9:
10: \input trademark
11: \let\tradeNAMfont=\relax
12: \let\tradeORGfont=\relax
13:
14: \begin{document}
15:
16: \title {ISODE:\\ Past, Present, and Future\\[0.25in] and\\[0.25in]
17: Strategies for\\ Transition and Coexistence}
18: \author {Marshall T.~Rose\\ The Wollongong Group, Inc.}
19: \date {March 24, 1988}
20: \maketitlepage
21:
22:
23: \begin{bwslide}
24: \part* {AGENDA}\bf
25:
26: \begin{description}
27: \item[PART I:] MOTIVATION (WHY ISODE?)
28:
29: \item[PART II:] STRATEGIES FOR TRANSITION/COEXISTENCE
30:
31: \item[PART III:] CURRENT STATUS OF ISODE
32:
33: \item[PART IV:] FUTURE DIRECTIONS FOR ISODE
34: \end{description}
35: \end{bwslide}
36:
37:
38: \begin{bwslide}
39: \ctitle {WHAT IS ISODE?}
40:
41: \begin{nrtc}
42: \item THE ISO DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT
43:
44: \item AN OPENLY AVAILABLE IMPLEMENATION OF THE UPPER LAYERS OF OSI?
45:
46: \item A BASIS FOR THE TRANSITION TO OSI?
47:
48: \item AN EXERCISE IN MEGA-CODING?
49:
50: \item A PLAYGROUND FOR ``THE PIED-PIPER OF OSI''?
51: \end{nrtc}
52: \end{bwslide}
53:
54:
55: \begin{bwslide}
56: \part {MOTIVATION\\ (WHY ISODE?)}\bf
57:
58: \begin{nrtc}
59: \item EXPERIMENT WITH OSI UPPER LAYERS
60:
61: \item EXPLORE PROTOCOL TRANSITION ISSUES
62: \end{nrtc}
63: \end{bwslide}
64:
65:
66: \begin{bwslide}
67: \ctitle {NORTHROP RESEARCH AND\\ TECHNOLOGY CENTER:\\ JANUARY, 1986}
68:
69: \begin{nrtc}
70: \item THE AUTOMATION SCIENCES LABORATORY WAS INTERESTED IN SOLVING CERTAIN
71: PROBLEMS IN THE FACTORY AUTOMATION AREA
72:
73: \item AN ``AFTER-HOURS'' PROJECT WAS STARTED TO LOOK INTO THE APPLICABILITY
74: OF MIXING OSI AND TCP/IP TECHNOLOGIES
75: \end{nrtc}
76: \end{bwslide}
77:
78:
79: \begin{bwslide}
80: \part* {EXPERIMENT WITH OSI UPPER LAYERS}\bf
81:
82: \begin{nrtc}
83: \item THE UPPER LAYERS OF OSI APPEARED TO BE A RICH PLAYGROUND
84:
85: \item WE WANTED TO SEE HOW USEFUL THE UPPER LAYERS REALLY WERE
86: \end{nrtc}
87: \end{bwslide}
88:
89:
90: \begin{bwslide}
91: \ctitle {(OBLIGATORY SLIDE SHOWING)\\ THE 7--LAYER STACK}
92:
93: \vskip.5in
94: \diagram[p]{figure1}
95: \end{bwslide}
96:
97:
98: \begin{bwslide}
99: \part* {THE UPPER-LAYER ARCHITECTURE}\bf
100:
101: \begin{nrtc}
102: \item BY ``UPPER-LAYER'' WE MEAN EVERYTHING ABOVE TRANSPORT:
103: \begin{nrtc}
104: \item THE APPLICATION-SPECIFICS OF HOW THE NETWORK IS USED
105: \end{nrtc}
106:
107: \item UNLIKE OTHER ARCHITECTURES, THE SAME UPPER-LAYERS ARE USED
108: REGARDLESS OF THE APPLICATION
109:
110: \item WHAT DIFFERS IS THE ACTUAL FUNCTIONALITY USED BY THE APPLICATION
111: \end{nrtc}
112: \end{bwslide}
113:
114:
115: \begin{bwslide}
116: \ctitle {THE UPPER-LAYER ARCHITECTURE (cont.)}
117:
118: \vskip.15in
119: \diagram[p]{figure2}
120: \end{bwslide}
121:
122:
123: \begin{bwslide}
124: \ctitle {THE OSI APPLICATION LAYER}
125:
126: \begin{nrtc}
127: \item MANY STANDARD SERVICE ELEMENTS
128: \begin{nrtc}
129: \item ASSOCIATION CONTROL
130:
131: \item REMOTE OPERATIONS
132:
133: \item RELIABLE TRANSFER
134:
135: \item COMMITMENT, CONCURRENCY AND RECOVERY
136:
137: \item DIRECTORY SERVICES
138: \end{nrtc}
139:
140: \item ABSTRACT SYNTAX NOTATION ONE (ASN.1)
141: \end{nrtc}
142: \end{bwslide}
143:
144:
145: \begin{bwslide}
146: \ctitle {APPLICATION USE OF UPPER-LAYER SERVICES}
147:
148: \vskip.5in
149: \diagram[p]{figure3}
150: \end{bwslide}
151:
152:
153: \begin{bwslide}
154: \ctitle {APPLICATION SERVICE ELEMENTS}
155:
156: \begin{nrtc}
157: \item A USEFUL MECHANISM FOR DIVIDING RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ``TOTAL''
158: APPLICATION PROTOCOL
159:
160: \item PROMOTES ``REUSE'' OF APPLICATION LAYER FACILITIES
161: \end{nrtc}
162: \end{bwslide}
163:
164:
165: \begin{bwslide}
166: \ctitle {ABSTRACT SYNTAX NOTATION ONE (ASN.1)}
167:
168: \begin{nrtc}
169: \item UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE TO DESCRIBE DATA WITH STRONG TYPING
170:
171: \item (TOO) RICH, EXTENSIBLE SYNTAX
172:
173: \item USEFUL FOR SPECIFICATION OF NEW PROTOCOLS
174: \begin{nrtc}
175: \item ``CLEAR-TO-READ'' SPECIFICATIONS (ha!)
176:
177: \item NOT TIED TO MACHINE-ORIENTED STRUCTURES AND RESTRICTIONS
178: \end{nrtc}
179:
180: \item REPRESENTATION CURRENTLY USED BY ALL OSI APPLICATIONS
181: \end{nrtc}
182: \end{bwslide}
183:
184:
185: \begin{bwslide}
186: \ctitle {EXAMPLE:\\ FTAM USE OF LOWER-LAYER SERVICES}
187:
188: \vskip.5in
189: \diagram[p]{figure4}
190: \end{bwslide}
191:
192:
193: \begin{bwslide}
194: \ctitle {ONLY ONE LITTLE PROBLEM$\ldots$}
195:
196: \begin{nrtc}
197: \item HOW TO RUN THE OSI UPPER-LAYERS IN A TCP/IP-BASED NETWORK?
198:
199: \item A SOLUTION IS OFFERED BY LAYERING
200: \begin{nrtc}
201: \item THE OSI TRANSPORT \underline{SERVICE} IS VERY SIMPLE
202:
203: \item CAN WE PROVIDE AN EMULATION OF THAT SERVICE USING TCP?
204: \end{nrtc}
205: \end{nrtc}
206: \end{bwslide}
207:
208:
209: \begin{bwslide}
210: \ctitle {SERVICE EMULATOR AT TRANSPORT}
211:
212: \vskip.5in
213: \diagram[p]{figure5}
214: \end{bwslide}
215:
216:
217: \begin{bwslide}
218: \ctitle {THE OSI TRANSPORT SERVICE}
219:
220: \begin{nrtc}
221: \item ALTHOUGH THE SERVICE IS VERY SIMPLE, THERE ARE ACTUALLY FIVE DIFFERENT
222: ISO PROTOCOLS WHICH CAN BE USED (TP0$\ldots$TP4)
223:
224: \item PROTOCOLS CAN BE DIVIDED INTO TWO CLASSES, BASED ON THE UNDERLYING
225: NETWORK SERVICE
226: \begin{nrtc}
227: \item A CONNECTION-ORIENTED NETWORK SERVICE (CONS), e.g., X.25
228:
229:
230: \item A CONNECTIONLESS-MODE NETWORK SERVICE (CLNS), e.g., CLNP
231: \end{nrtc}
232: \end{nrtc}
233: \end{bwslide}
234:
235:
236: \begin{bwslide}
237: \ctitle {ISO TRANSPORT SERVICES\\ ON TOP OF THE DoD TCP}
238:
239: \begin{nrtc}
240: \item IDEA: TAKE THE SIMPLEST PROTOCOL (TP0) AND DEFINE A MAPPING ONTO
241: THE DoD TCP
242:
243: \item{} [RFC983], PUBLISHED IN APRIL OF 1986, WAS OUR FIRST ATTEMPT AT THIS
244:
245: \item TWO VERSIONS AND 13 MONTHS LATER, [RFC1006] GOT IT RIGHT, TELLING
246: ``HOW TO SPEAK TP0 OVER THE TCP''
247:
248: \item NOTE: THIS APPROACH IS NOT UNIQUE TO TCP/IP-BASED NETWORKS!
249: \end{nrtc}
250: \end{bwslide}
251:
252:
253: \begin{bwslide}
254: \ctitle {ISO TRANSPORT SERVICES\\ ON TOP OF THE DoD TCP (cont.)}
255:
256: \vskip.25in
257: \diagram[p]{figure6}
258: \end{bwslide}
259:
260:
261: \begin{bwslide}
262: \ctitle {EXPLORE PROTOCOL TRANSITION ISSUES}
263:
264: \begin{nrtc}
265: \item DOES THIS APPROACH MAKE TRANSITION OR COEXISTENCE EASIER?
266: \end{nrtc}
267: \end{bwslide}
268:
269:
270: \begin{bwslide}
271: \part {STRATEGIES FOR TRANSITION/COEXISTENCE}\bf
272:
273: \begin{nrtc}
274: \item THERE ARE MANY TCP/IP NETWORKS TODAY; THERE WILL BE MORE TOMORROW
275:
276: \item BY THE TIME OSI BECOMES A WORTHWHILE OPERATIONAL ALTERNATIVE,
277: THERE WILL BE MANY MORE TCP/IP NETWORKS THAN THERE ARE TODAY!
278:
279: \item PROBLEM: HOW TO PROTECT INSTALLED BASE?
280:
281: \item PROBLEM: HOW TO TRANSITION GRACEFULLY?
282: \end{nrtc}
283: \end{bwslide}
284:
285:
286: \begin{bwslide}
287: \ctitle {METRICS FOR COMPARISON}
288:
289: \begin{nrtc}
290: \item CAN JUDGE A TRANSITION/COEXISTENCE SCHEME USING DIFFERENT
291: CRITERIA
292:
293: \item HERE ARE A FEW
294: \begin{nrtc}
295: \item PERFORMANCE:
296: \begin{nrtc}
297: \item THROUGHPUT
298:
299: \item RESPONSE
300: \end{nrtc}
301:
302: \item FLEXIBILITY:
303: \begin{nrtc}
304: \item RANGE OF APPLICABILITY
305: \end{nrtc}
306:
307: \item TRANSPARENCY:
308: \begin{nrtc}
309: \item USAGE CONTINUITY
310:
311: \item SEAMLESS USER INTERFACE
312: \end{nrtc}
313:
314: \item PERVASIVENESS:
315: \begin{nrtc}
316: \item MANAGEABILITY
317: \end{nrtc}
318: \end{nrtc}
319: \end{nrtc}
320: \end{bwslide}
321:
322:
323: \begin{bwslide}
324: \ctitle {FOUR CANDIDATES}
325:
326: \begin{nrtc}
327: \item DUAL STACK
328:
329: \item APPLICATION GATEWAYS
330:
331: \item TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES
332:
333: \item NETWORK-SERVICE BRIDGES
334: \end{nrtc}
335: \end{bwslide}
336:
337:
338: \begin{bwslide}
339: \part* {DUAL STACK}\bf
340:
341: \begin{nrtc}
342: \item PUT BOTH PROTOCOL SUITES IN ALL HOSTS
343:
344: \item NICE WORK, IF YOU CAN GET IT
345: \end{nrtc}
346: \end{bwslide}
347:
348:
349: \begin{bwslide}
350: \ctitle {DUAL STACK (cont.)}
351:
352: \vskip.5in
353: \diagram[p]{figure16}
354: \end{bwslide}
355:
356:
357: \begin{bwslide}
358: \ctitle {CHARACTERISTICS}
359:
360: \begin{nrtc}
361: \item PERFORMANCE: NO DEGRADATION
362:
363: \item FLEXIBILITY: NOT REALLY; HAVE TO ADD EACH APPLICATION TO EACH HOST
364:
365: \item TRANSPARENCY:
366: \begin{nrtc}
367: \item ASSUMING REMOTE SYSTEM SUPPORTS AT LEAST ONE OF THE PROTOCOL
368: STACKS, THEN HIGH TRANSPARENCY BY USING COMMON SERVICE
369: INTERFACE
370: \end{nrtc}
371:
372: \item PERVASIVENESS:
373: \begin{nrtc}
374: \item BOTH END- AND INTERMEDIATE-SYSTEMS MUST RUN BOTH PROTOCOLS
375:
376: \item INTRODUCES ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS AS THERE ARE NOW TWO
377: LOGICAL NETWORKS
378: \begin{nrtc}
379: \item MANAGEMENT OF BOTH \underline{PLUS} CONTENTION BETWEEN THEM
380: \end{nrtc}
381: \end{nrtc}
382: \end{nrtc}
383: \end{bwslide}
384:
385:
386: \begin{bwslide}
387: \part* {APPLICATION GATEWAYS}\bf
388:
389: \begin{nrtc}
390: \item A WELL-KNOWN, BUT LITTLE-UNDERSTOOD TECHNOLOGY
391: \begin{nrtc}
392: \item USED IN MESSAGE HANDLING QUITE A BIT\\
393: (AND MOST ARE QUITE TERRIBLE)
394:
395: \item NOT REALLY USED OTHERWISE
396: \end{nrtc}
397:
398: \item THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF A-GWY's:
399: \begin{nrtc}
400: \item SAME APPLICATION PROTOCOL,\\
401: BUT DIFFERENT UNDERLYING LAYERS
402:
403: \item DIFFERENT APPLICATION PROTOCOLS,\\
404: UNDERLYING LAYERS UNIMPORTANT
405: \end{nrtc}
406:
407: \item WE'LL CONSIDER ONLY THE LATTER TYPE
408: \end{nrtc}
409: \end{bwslide}
410:
411:
412: \begin{bwslide}
413: \ctitle {APPLICATION GATEWAYS (cont.)}
414:
415: \vskip.5in
416: \diagram[p]{figure7}
417: \end{bwslide}
418:
419:
420: \begin{bwslide}
421: \ctitle {CHARACTERISTICS}
422:
423: \begin{nrtc}
424: \item PERFORMANCE: USUALLY POOR, BUT ACCEPTABLE FOR STORE-AND-FORWARD
425: APPLICATIONS
426: \begin{nrtc}
427: \item TYPICALLY ALSO INTRODUCES ADDITIONAL NETWORK TRAFFIC
428: \end{nrtc}
429:
430: \item FLEXIBILITY: NONE; EACH A-GWY IS A SPECIAL-PURPOSE SOFTWARE BOX
431:
432:
433: \item TRANSPARENCY:
434: \begin{nrtc}
435: \item TO SERVICE: OFTEN LOSES SIGNIFICANT FUNCTIONALITY
436:
437: \item TO USERS: POSSIBLE, BUT NOT LIKELY (e.g., IN AN FTAM/FTP A-GWY,
438: USERS EMBED HOSTNAMES IN FILENAMES)
439: \end{nrtc}
440:
441: \item PERVASIVENESS:
442: \begin{nrtc}
443: \item REQUIRES NO END-SYSTEM MODIFICATION
444:
445: \item MAY INTRODUCE ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS
446: \end{nrtc}
447: \end{nrtc}
448: \end{bwslide}
449:
450:
451: \begin{bwslide}
452: \part* {A NEW APPROACH}\bf
453:
454: \begin{nrtc}
455: \item PREDICTION: BY THE TIME OSI IS A WORTHWHILE ALTERNATIVE,
456: TCP/IP WILL ALREADY OFFER A MIX OF SERVICES:
457: \begin{nrtc}
458: \item SUCH AS FTAM AND MHS, IN ADDITION TO FTP AND SMTP
459: \end{nrtc}
460:
461: \item OBVIOUSLY, ONE METHOD OF DOING THIS IS TO USE THE [RFC1006] APPROACH
462: \end{nrtc}
463: \end{bwslide}
464:
465:
466: \begin{bwslide}
467: \ctitle {OBSERVATION}
468:
469: \begin{nrtc}
470: \item GIVEN THE ABOVE ASSUMPTION, IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT:
471: \begin{nrtc}
472: \item THE TWO COMMUNITIES WILL BE USING THE SAME APPLICATIONS (OSI),
473: AND
474:
475: \item ONLY THE UNDERLYING ``TS-STACK'' WILL DIFFER BETWEEN THE TWO:
476: \begin{nrtc}
477: \item IN THE ISO COMMUNITY: TP4/CLNP/$\ldots$
478:
479: \item IN THE TCP COMMUNITY: [RFC1006]/TCP/IP/$\ldots$
480: \end{nrtc}
481: \end{nrtc}
482:
483: \item THIS LEADS US TO POSTULATE AN INTERESTING COEXISTENCE
484: STRATEGY:
485: \begin{nrtc}
486: \item LET'S RUN OSI APPLICATIONS BETWEEN THE TWO COMMUNITIES
487: \end{nrtc}
488:
489: \item IN A SENSE, THIS IS A HYBRID OF THE TWO PREVIOUS APPROACHES,
490: INTENDED TO MINIMIZE THE DISADVANTAGES OF EACH
491: \end{nrtc}
492: \end{bwslide}
493:
494:
495: \begin{bwslide}
496: \ctitle {TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES}
497:
498: \begin{nrtc}
499: \item IDEA: OFFER THE SAME TRANSPORT SERVICE INTERFACE IN BOTH
500: COMMUNITIES (THE ISO TRANSPORT SERVICE)
501: \begin{nrtc}
502: \item USE [RFC1006] TO OFFER THE ISO TRANSPORT SERVICE ON TOP OF
503: THE DoD TCP
504: \end{nrtc}
505:
506: \item INTRODUCE A TRANSPORT ENTITY CALLED THE ``TS-BRIDGE''
507:
508: \item THE TS-BRIDGE ``COPIES'' SERVICE PRIMITIVES FROM ONE COMMUNITY TO THE
509: OTHER, e.g.:
510: \begin{nrtc}
511: \item UPON RECEIVING A T-CONNECT.INDICATION PRIMITIVE FROM ONE
512: TS-STACK,
513:
514: \item IT ISSUES A T-CONNECT.REQUEST PRIMITIVE TO THE OTHER TS-STACK
515: \end{nrtc}
516:
517: \item POTENTIAL PROBLEMS:
518: \begin{nrtc}
519: \item THE TS-BRIDGE MAINTAINS STATE AS TO THE EXISTING CONNECTIONS
520:
521: \item TWO CHECKSUMS, AND NEITHER REALLY END-TO-END
522: \end{nrtc}
523: \end{nrtc}
524: \end{bwslide}
525:
526:
527: \begin{bwslide}
528: \ctitle {TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES (cont.)}
529:
530: \vskip.5in
531: \diagram[p]{figure8}
532: \end{bwslide}
533:
534:
535: \begin{bwslide}
536: \ctitle {TRANSPARENT USE OF TS-BRIDGES}
537:
538: \begin{nrtc}
539: \item BY JUDICIOUS USE OF DIRECTORY SERVICES, SELECTION OF THE
540: TS-BRIDGE CAN BE MADE TRANSPARENT ON BOTH ENDPOINTS
541:
542: \item CONSIDER A ``TYPICAL'' PRESENTATION ADDRESS:
543: \[\begin{tabular}{ll}
544: network address:& CLNP 4700050017000008002000405301\\
545: transport selector:& 1\\
546: session selector:& ``FTAM''\\
547: presentation selector:& null
548: \end{tabular}\]
549:
550: \item A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT ENTRY IS RETURNED FOR HOSTS IN THE
551: OPPOSITE COMMUNITY:
552: \[\begin{tabular}{ll}
553: network address:& ts-bridge's network address\\
554: transport selector:& \begin{tabular}[t]{ll}
555: network address:&
556: CLNP 47 $\ldots$\\
557: transport selector:& 1
558: \end{tabular}\\
559: session selector:& ``FTAM''\\
560: presentation selector:& null
561: \end{tabular}\]
562: \end{nrtc}
563: \end{bwslide}
564:
565:
566: \begin{bwslide}
567: \ctitle {ANOTHER PROBLEM SOLVED:\\ ISO CONS versus CLNS}
568:
569: \begin{nrtc}
570: \item IN GENERAL, THE TS-BRIDGE SHOWS HOW TO PERFORM
571: ``IMPEDENCE MATCHING'' BETWEEN TWO PROTOCOLS WHICH OFFER THE
572: SAME SERVICE INTERFACE, e.g., OUR USE IS:
573: \begin{nrtc}
574: \item PROTOCOLS: TP4/CLNP AND TP0/TCP
575:
576: \item SERVICE: ISO TRANSPORT SERVICE
577: \end{nrtc}
578:
579: \item THIS IS SUSPICIOUSLY SIMILAR TO THE ISO TP4/CLNS vs. TP0/CONS PROBLEM:
580: \begin{nrtc}
581: \item PROTOCOLS: TP4/CLNP AND TP0/X.25
582:
583: \item SERVICE: ISO TRANSPORT SERVICE
584: \end{nrtc}
585:
586: \item THE TS-BRIDGE WILL ALSO WORK IN THIS ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT
587: MEANINGFUL LOSS OF GENERALITY:
588: \begin{nrtc}
589: \item EXPEDITED DATA IS NEGOTIATED AWAY, AND
590:
591: \item INITIAL USER DATA RESULTS IN DISCONNECT
592: \end{nrtc}
593: \end{nrtc}
594: \end{bwslide}
595:
596:
597: \begin{bwslide}
598: \ctitle {AN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TS-BRIDGE}
599:
600: \begin{nrtc}
601: \item USING ISODE, WOLLONGONG HAS IMPLEMENTED A TS-BRIDGE
602:
603: \item AT UNIFORUM IN FEBRUARY, 1987, THE
604: \begin{nrtc}
605: \item TP4/CLNP to TP0/TCP
606: \end{nrtc}
607: ``IMPEDENCE MATCHING'' WAS DEMONSTRATED
608:
609: \item CURRENTLY, ALL THREE TS-STACKS
610: \begin{nrtc}
611: \item TP4/CLNP, TP0/X.25, TP0/TCP
612: \end{nrtc}
613: ARE BEING BRIDGED (ON A SINGLE HOST) AT WOLLONGONG
614: \end{nrtc}
615: \end{bwslide}
616:
617:
618: \begin{bwslide}
619: \ctitle {CHARACTERISTICS}
620:
621: \begin{nrtc}
622: \item PERFORMANCE: FAIR; WHEN TS-BRIDGE IS MADE INTO A KERNEL-RESIDENT
623: STREAMS MODULE IT SHOULD IMPROVE DRAMATICALLY
624:
625: \item FLEXIBILITY: HIGH; INDEPENDENT OF ANY APPLICATION
626:
627: \item TRANSPARENCY: TOTAL
628:
629: \item PERVASIVENESS:
630: \begin{nrtc}
631: \item END-SYSTEMS MUST RUN ``NEW'' PROTOCOLS
632:
633: \item MAY INTRODUCE ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS (WHICH SHOULD BE SOLVED
634: DYNAMICALLY BY DIRECTORY SERVICES)
635: \end{nrtc}
636: \end{nrtc}
637: \end{bwslide}
638:
639:
640: \begin{bwslide}
641: \part* {NETWORK-SERVICE BRIDGES}\bf
642:
643: \begin{nrtc}
644: \item IDEA: ENCAPSULATE CLNP INSIDE OF IP, TREATING IP AS SIMPLY A DATA LINK
645: PROTOCOL
646:
647: \item NS-BRIDGE PERFORMS AS A ROUTER, REMOVING ONE DATA LINK HEADER AND
648: ADDING ANOTHER
649:
650: \item REQUIRES COMMON HIGHER-LEVEL PROTOCOLS (TRANSPORT AND ABOVE) ON BOTH
651: END-SYSTEMS, BUT DOES NOT REQUIRE ALL INTERVENTING ROUTERS TO USE THE
652: SAME NETWORK PROTOCOL
653: \end{nrtc}
654: \end{bwslide}
655:
656:
657: \begin{bwslide}
658: \ctitle {INTERESTING FEATURES}
659:
660: \begin{nrtc}
661: \item NO STATE MAINTAINED BY NS-BRIDGE
662:
663: \item A TRUE END-TO-END CHECKSUM
664:
665: \item THE TCP END-SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION CHOICES ARE SIMILAR TO NETBIOS OVER
666: TCP [RFC1001/1002]
667: \end{nrtc}
668: \end{bwslide}
669:
670:
671: \begin{bwslide}
672: \ctitle {NETWORK-SERVICE BRIDGES (cont.)}
673:
674: \vskip.5in
675: \diagram[p]{figure17}
676: \end{bwslide}
677:
678:
679: \begin{bwslide}
680: \ctitle {CHARACTERISTICS}
681:
682: \begin{nrtc}
683: \item PERFORMANCE: NO WORSE THAN TYPICAL CLNP-ROUTER (AND PROBABLY A LOT
684: BETTER TOO!)
685:
686: \item FLEXIBILITY: HIGH (INDEPENDENT OF ANY APPLICATION)
687:
688: \item TRANSPARENCY: TOTAL
689:
690: \item PERVASIVENESS: SOME END-SYSTEMS MUST RUN BOTH TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS
691: \end{nrtc}
692: \end{bwslide}
693:
694:
695: \begin{bwslide}
696: \part {CURRENT STATUS\\ OF ISODE}\bf
697:
698: \begin{nrtc}
699: \item CURRENT DISTRIBUTION
700:
701: \item WHERE IN USE
702:
703: \item THE APPLICATIONS COOKBOOK
704:
705: \item MHS/DS WORK AT UCL/UNott
706: \end{nrtc}
707: \end{bwslide}
708:
709:
710: \begin{bwslide}
711: \part* {CURRENT DISTRIBUTION}\bf
712:
713: \begin{nrtc}
714: \item STATUS: OPENLY AVAILABLE UNDER AN IMPLICIT ``HOLD HARMLESS'' CLAUSE
715:
716: \item CURRENT RELEASE: 3.0
717: \begin{nrtc}
718: \item AVAILABLE OCTOBER 15, 1987
719: \end{nrtc}
720:
721: \item CURRENT DISTRIBUTION: 3.5(BETA)
722: \begin{nrtc}
723: \item AVAILABLE MARCH 15, 1988
724: \end{nrtc}
725:
726: \item DISTRIBUTION EITHER VIA POSTAL MAIL OR ARPAnet FTP
727: \begin{nrtc}
728: \item SOURCE: \~{}6MB
729:
730: \item DOC: 4~VOLUME USER'S MANUAL (\~{}600~PAGES)
731:
732: \item DISTRIBUTION SITES: US, UK, AND AU
733:
734: \item PRICE: \~{}200~US DOLLARS
735: \end{nrtc}
736: \end{nrtc}
737: \end{bwslide}
738:
739:
740: \begin{bwslide}
741: \ctitle {LANGUAGES AND OPERATING SYSTEMS}
742:
743: \begin{nrtc}
744: \item CODED ENTIRELY IN C FOR \unix/
745: \begin{nrtc}
746: \item REQUIRES NO KERNEL MODIFICATIONS
747: \end{nrtc}
748:
749: \item KNOWN PORTS FOR BERKELEY \unix/ (4.2 and 4.3):
750: \begin{nrtc}
751: \item VAXen, SUNs, Pyramids, RTs, etc.
752: \end{nrtc}
753:
754: \item KNOWN PORTS FOR AT\&T \unix/ (SVR2 and SVR3):
755: \begin{nrtc}
756: \item SGI, 3Bs, 386s, RT (AIX)
757: \end{nrtc}
758:
759: \item MS-DOS (CURRENTLY CLIENT SIDE ONLY)
760: \begin{nrtc}
761: \item PORT DONE BY HP IN THE UK
762:
763: \item DON'T KNOW STATUS OF CODE
764: \end{nrtc}
765: \end{nrtc}
766: \end{bwslide}
767:
768:
769: \begin{bwslide}
770: \ctitle {APPLICATION ARCHITECTURE}
771:
772: \begin{nrtc}
773: \item A (NEARLY) COMPLETE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UPPER LAYERS
774:
775: \item CURRENTLY DIS LEVEL
776: \begin{nrtc}
777: \item IN PROCESS OF BEING UPGRADED TO IS
778: \end{nrtc}
779:
780: \item ALIGNED WITH THE U.S.~GOSIP
781: \end{nrtc}
782: \end{bwslide}
783:
784:
785: \begin{bwslide}
786: \ctitle {THE APPLICATION ENVIRONMENT}
787:
788: \vskip.5in
789: \diagram[p]{figure9}
790: \end{bwslide}
791:
792:
793: \begin{bwslide}
794: \ctitle {AN ALTERNATE ENVIRONMENT:\\ MHS ARCHITECTURE (c.~1984)}
795:
796: \vskip.5in
797: \diagram[p]{figure10}
798: \end{bwslide}
799:
800:
801: \begin{bwslide}
802: \ctitle {APPLICATIONS}
803:
804: \begin{nrtc}
805: \item FILE TRANSFER, ACCESS AND MANAGEMENT (FTAM)
806:
807: \item ISODE MISCELLANY SERVICE
808: \begin{nrtc}
809: \item e.g., FINGER, QUOTE-OF-THE-DAY, etc.
810: \end{nrtc}
811:
812: \item PLUS NUMEROUS ``DEMO'' PROGRAMS
813: \begin{nrtc}
814: \item e.g., IMAGE SERVICE, PASSWORD LOOKUP, etc.
815: \end{nrtc}
816: \end{nrtc}
817: \end{bwslide}
818:
819:
820: \begin{bwslide}
821: \ctitle {STUB DIRECTORY SERVICE}
822:
823: \begin{nrtc}
824: \item PENDING DEVELOPMENT OF DIRECTORY SERVICES STANDARD AND IMPLEMENTATION,
825: NEEDED A STUB FACILITY TO PROVIDE DIRECTORY SERVICES
826:
827: \item IN ESSENCE, DIRECTORY SERVICES PROVIDE TWO MAPPINGS:
828: \begin{nrtc}
829: \item SERVICE NAME TO AN APPLICATION ENTITY TITLE
830:
831: \item APPLICATION ENTITY TITLE TO PRESENTATION ADDRESS
832: \end{nrtc}
833: \end{nrtc}
834: \end{bwslide}
835:
836:
837: \begin{bwslide}
838: \ctitle {LOCAL INTERPRETATIONS}
839:
840: \begin{nrtc}
841: \item SERVICE NAME: A LOCAL MATTER
842: \begin{nrtc}
843: \item WE USE ``\verb"<designator>-<qualifier>"'', WHERE
844:
845: \item \verb"<designator>" DENOTES A LOCALE, AND
846:
847: \item \verb"<qualifier>" DENOTES THE TYPE OF ENTITY
848: \end{nrtc}
849:
850: \item APPLICATION ENTITY TITLE: OPAQUE
851: \begin{nrtc}
852: \item USE OBJECT IDENTIFIER (DIS ACSE)
853: \end{nrtc}
854:
855: \item PRESENTATION ADDRESS:
856: \begin{nrtc}
857: \item 1 OR MORE NETWORK ADDRESSES
858: \begin{nrtc}
859: \item EACH ADDRESS IS TAGGED (TCP, X.25, OR NS)
860:
861: \item BASED ON TAG, DIFFERENT INFORMATION IS PRESENT
862: \end{nrtc}
863:
864: \item T-, S-, AND P-SELECTORS
865: \begin{nrtc}
866: \item ARBITRARY OCTET STRINGS (0..64)
867:
868: \item SUPPORT FOR GOSIP-STYLE IDENTIFIERS (PORT NUMBERS)
869: \end{nrtc}
870: \end{nrtc}
871: \end{nrtc}
872: \end{bwslide}
873:
874:
875: \begin{bwslide}
876: \ctitle {DIRECTORY MAPPINGS}
877:
878: \vskip.5in
879: \diagram[p]{figure15}
880: \end{bwslide}
881:
882:
883: \begin{bwslide}
884: \ctitle {THE TRANSPORT SWITCH}
885:
886: \begin{nrtc}
887: \item DECIDES WHICH TS-STACK TO USE FOR A CONNECTION
888:
889: \item FOR TP0:
890: \begin{nrtc}
891: \item TCP (SOCKETS)
892:
893: \item X.25 (SEVERAL INTERFACES, MOSTLY SOCKETS)
894: \end{nrtc}
895:
896: \item FOR TP4:
897: \begin{nrtc}
898: \item TWG's PROPRIETARY WIN/ISO (TLI)
899:
900: \item SunLink OSI (EVENT SOCKETS)
901: \end{nrtc}
902:
903: \item EXPERIENCE SHOWS IT IS FAIRLY EASY TO ADD A NEW TS-STACK TO THE SWITCH
904: \end{nrtc}
905: \end{bwslide}
906:
907:
908: \begin{bwslide}
909: \part* {WHERE IN USE}\bf
910:
911: \begin{nrtc}
912: \item HARD TO TELL HOW MANY COPIES ARE IN USE (DUE TO AVAILABILITY VIA
913: ARPAnet FTP)
914:
915: \item AT LAST COUNT, ABOUT 350~DIFFERENT SITES USING ISODE
916:
917: \item IN ADDITION TO SITES IN THE US:
918: \begin{nrtc}
919: \item WESTERN EUROPE
920:
921: \item MIDDLE EAST (ISRAEL)
922:
923: \item SOUTH PACIFIC (AUSTRALIA)
924:
925: \item ASIA (SOUTH KOREA, JAPAN)
926: \end{nrtc}
927: \end{nrtc}
928: \end{bwslide}
929:
930:
931: \begin{note}\em
932: in fact, at one map/top meeting, it was noted that
933:
934: \begin{quote}
935: ``NORTHROP has shipped more OSI software than any OSI vendor''
936: \end{quote}
937:
938: by one of the leading OSI vendors!
939: This was before the release of ISODE~3.0 in October, 1987.
940: \end{note}
941:
942:
943: \begin{bwslide}
944: \ctitle {PROJECTS}
945:
946: \begin{nrtc}
947: \item THREE PILOT PROJECTS IN OSI INFRASTRUCTURE IN EUROPE
948: \begin{nrtc}
949: \item A NATIONAL PROJECT IN THE UK
950:
951: \item A NATIONAL PROJECT IN WEST GERMANY (DFN)
952:
953: \item A PROJECT FOR RARE (THE EUROPEAN ACADEMIC COMMUNITY)
954: \end{nrtc}
955:
956: \item IN USE BY DIFFERENT CONFORMANCE TESTING ORGANIZATIONS
957: \begin{nrtc}
958: \item THE CORPORATION FOR OPEN SYSTEMS IN THE US
959:
960: \item THE NATIONAL COMPUTER CENTRE IN THE UK
961: \end{nrtc}
962:
963: \item ENDORSED BY THE NSF (DNCRI)
964: \end{nrtc}
965: \end{bwslide}
966:
967:
968: \begin{bwslide}
969: \part* {THE APPLICATIONS COOKBOOK}\bf
970:
971: \begin{nrtc}
972: \item TOOLS TO FACILITATE DEVELOPMENT OF APPLICATIONS ARE CRITICAL
973:
974: \item IDEA IS TO DEVELOP TOOLS TO AUTOMATE USE OF OSI REMOTE OPERATIONS
975: SERVICE AS A GENERAL REMOTE PROCEDURE CALL FACILITY
976:
977: \item ECMA TR/31: REMOTE OPERATIONS -- CONCEPTS, NOTATION AND
978: CONNECTION-ORIENTED MAPPINGS (SECTIONS 1--4)
979: \end{nrtc}
980: \end{bwslide}
981:
982:
983: \begin{bwslide}
984: \ctitle {REMOTE OPERATIONS SERVICE (ROS)}
985:
986: \begin{nrtc}
987: \item STANDARDIZED MECHANISM FOR SPECIFYING TRANSACTIONS
988:
989: \item EMPLOYS POWER OF ASN.1
990:
991: \item USED IN MANY INTERESTING OSI APPLICATIONS
992: \begin{nrtc}
993: \item MESSAGE HANDLING SYSTEMS
994:
995: \item DIRECTORY SERVICES
996:
997: \item NETWORK MANAGEMENT
998:
999: \item REMOTE DATABASE ACCESS
1000: \end{nrtc}
1001:
1002: \item CURRENTLY CONNECTION-ORIENTED, BUT CONNECTIONLESS-MODE IS UNDER STUDY
1003: \end{nrtc}
1004: \end{bwslide}
1005:
1006: \begin{bwslide}
1007: \ctitle {GENERAL ORGANIZATION}
1008:
1009: \begin{nrtc}
1010: \item AT COMPILE-TIME:
1011: \begin{nrtc}
1012: \item USE RO-SPECIFICATION TO GENERATE SUPPORT FACILITIES
1013: \end{nrtc}
1014:
1015: \item AT RUN-TIME:
1016: \begin{nrtc}
1017: \item USE DIRECTORY SERVICES TO LOCATE/REGISTER NETWORK SERVICES
1018:
1019: \item USE ASSOCIATION CONTROL TO BIND/UNBIND APPLICATIONS
1020:
1021: \item USE REMOTE OPERATIONS TO INVOKE TRANSACTIONS
1022: \end{nrtc}
1023: \end{nrtc}
1024: \end{bwslide}
1025:
1026:
1027: \begin{bwslide}
1028: \ctitle {STATIC (COMPILE-TIME) ORGANIZATION}
1029:
1030: \vskip.15in
1031: \diagram[p]{figure11}
1032: \end{bwslide}
1033:
1034:
1035: \begin{bwslide}
1036: \ctitle {DYNAMIC (RUN-TIME) ORGANIZATION}
1037:
1038: \vskip.15in
1039: \diagram[p]{figure12}
1040: \end{bwslide}
1041:
1042:
1043: \begin{bwslide}
1044: \ctitle {CURRENT STATUS}
1045:
1046: \begin{nrtc}
1047: \item STATIC AND DYNAMIC FACILITIES
1048: \begin{nrtc}
1049: \item ALL TOOLS/LIBRARIES ARE DEVELOPED AND MOST RECENT UPGRADES
1050: HAVE NEARLY COMPLETED BETA TESTING
1051:
1052: \item ``REAL'' (DYNAMIC) DIRECTORY SERVICES IS CURRENTLY TOO
1053: IMMATURE (BUT NOT FOR LONG!)
1054: \end{nrtc}
1055:
1056: \item AN ``APPLICATIONS COOKBOOK'' WAS WRITTEN AS VOLUME~4 OF THE USER'S
1057: MANUAL
1058: \end{nrtc}
1059: \end{bwslide}
1060:
1061:
1062: \begin{bwslide}
1063: \part* {MHS/DS WORK\\ AT UCL/UNott}\bf
1064:
1065: \begin{nrtc}
1066: \item SEVERAL OSI PROJECTS UNDERWAY IN THE COMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENTS
1067: AT THE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON AND THE UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM
1068:
1069: \item MAJOR EMPHASIS ON MESSAGE HANDLING AND DIRECTORY SERVICES
1070: \end{nrtc}
1071: \end{bwslide}
1072:
1073:
1074: \begin{bwslide}
1075: \ctitle {MESSAGE HANDLING}
1076:
1077: \begin{nrtc}
1078: \item UCL AND UNott ARE DEVELOPING AN X.400 TRANSPORT SYSTEM (PP)
1079:
1080: \item USE EXPERIENCE GAINED FROM NUMEROUS SOPHISTICATED TEXT-BASED MESSAGE
1081: TRANSFER SYSTEMS
1082:
1083: \item OWES MANY OF ITS DESIGN IDEAS TO THE UNIVERSITY OF DELAWARE MESSAGE
1084: SYSTEM, MMDF
1085:
1086: \item WILL UTILIZE DIRECTORY SERVICES
1087:
1088: \item WILL BE DISTRIBUTED WITH LATER VERSIONS OF ISODE
1089: \end{nrtc}
1090: \end{bwslide}
1091:
1092:
1093: \begin{bwslide}
1094: \ctitle {INTERESTING FEATURES}
1095:
1096: \begin{nrtc}
1097: \item SUPPORT FOR A WIDE RANGE OF ENCODED INFORMATION TYPES
1098: \begin{nrtc}
1099: \item AND REFORMATTING BETWEEN THEM
1100: \end{nrtc}
1101:
1102: \item SUPPORT FOR DIFFERENT MESSAGE TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS
1103: \begin{nrtc}
1104: \item AND CONVERSION BETWEEN THEM
1105: \end{nrtc}
1106: e.g., INCLUDES RFC987 (X.400 TO 821/822)
1107:
1108: \item ROBUSTNESS FOR USE IN LARGE SCALE SERVICE ENVIRONMENTS
1109: \end{nrtc}
1110: \end{bwslide}
1111:
1112:
1113: \begin{bwslide}
1114: \ctitle {MAJOR GOALS}
1115:
1116: \begin{nrtc}
1117: \item FULL X.400(84/88) SUPPORT, EXCEPT FOR X.400(88) SECURITY SERVICES
1118:
1119: \item PROVIDES A ``CLEAN'' INTERFACE FOR MESSAGE SUBMISSION AND DELIVERY
1120: \begin{nrtc}
1121: \item TO SUPPORT A WIDE RANGE OF USER AGENTS,
1122:
1123: \item AND APPLICATIONS OTHER THAN INTERPERSONAL MESSAGING
1124: \end{nrtc}
1125:
1126: \item QUEUE MANAGEMENT DONE VIA A ROS-BASED PROTOCOL
1127: \begin{nrtc}
1128: \item SOPHISTICATED SCHEDULING OF MESSAGE DELIVERY
1129:
1130: \item LOCAL AND REMOTE MONITORING FOR MANAGERS AND USERS
1131:
1132: \item ROBUSTNESS REQUIRED TO SUPPORT HIGH LEVELS OF TRAFFIC
1133:
1134: \item SUPPORT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE POLICIES ON SUBMISSION
1135: \end{nrtc}
1136:
1137: \item LIST EXPLODER AND LIST MANAGMENT
1138: \end{nrtc}
1139: \end{bwslide}
1140:
1141:
1142: \begin{bwslide}
1143: \ctitle {DIRECTORY SERVICES}
1144:
1145: \begin{nrtc}
1146: \item TWO DIFFERENT DIRECTORY SERVICE PROJECTS ARE UNDERWAY
1147: \begin{nrtc}
1148: \item CURRENTLY INTERWORKING WITH OTHER PILOT IMPLEMENTATIONS
1149: IN ESPRIT
1150: \end{nrtc}
1151:
1152: \item ONE SYSTEM, IN SOME FORM, WILL BE DISTRIBUTED WITH LATER VERSIONS
1153: OF ISODE
1154: \end{nrtc}
1155: \end{bwslide}
1156:
1157:
1158: \begin{bwslide}
1159: \part {FUTURE DIRECTIONS\\ FOR ISODE}\bf
1160:
1161: \begin{nrtc}
1162: \item OSI-POSIX PROJECT
1163:
1164: \item HOST-INTERFACE ISSUES
1165: \end{nrtc}
1166: \end{bwslide}
1167:
1168:
1169: \begin{bwslide}
1170: \part* {OSI-POSIX PROJECT}\bf
1171:
1172: \begin{nrtc}
1173: \item IF WE BELIEVE THAT:
1174: \begin{nrtc}
1175: \item OSI/ISO WILL EVENTUALLY DOMINATE COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS, AND
1176:
1177: \item THE U.S.~GOVERNMENT OSI PROFILE WILL BE THE INITIAL SET OF
1178: GUIDELINES FOR OSI PROCUREMENT
1179: \end{nrtc}
1180:
1181: \item WHAT CAN WE DO TO ACCELERATE THE PROCESS?
1182:
1183: \item NOTE: AFTER THE ENTERPRISE EVENT, MAP/TOP MAY DROP FROM
1184: MAINSTREAM OSI
1185: \end{nrtc}
1186: \end{bwslide}
1187:
1188:
1189: \begin{bwslide}
1190: \ctitle {GOSIP}
1191:
1192: \begin{nrtc}
1193: \item A (SOON-TO-BE) FEDERAL INFORMATION PROCESSING STANDARD
1194:
1195: \item PROPOSED TO ENABLE USERS TO SPECIFY AND PROCURE
1196: \begin{nrtc}
1197: \item INTEROPERABLE
1198:
1199: \item MULTI-VENDOR
1200:
1201: \item OFF-THE-SHELF
1202: \end{nrtc}
1203: COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS PRODUCTS
1204:
1205: \item THE \dod/:
1206: \begin{nrtc}
1207: \item IS ADOPTING GOSIP AS A CO-STANDARD WITH TCP/IP
1208:
1209: \item INTENDS (IN APPROX.~TWO YEARS) TO SPECIFY GOSIP AS THE
1210: \underline{ONLY} STANDARD FOR NON-PROPRIETARY, INTEROPERABLE
1211: COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS
1212: \end{nrtc}
1213: \end{nrtc}
1214: \end{bwslide}
1215:
1216:
1217: \begin{bwslide}
1218: \ctitle {A DIGRESSION:\\ OPERATING SYSTEMS}
1219:
1220: \begin{nrtc}
1221: \item LET US SUPPOSE THAT THE \unix/ FAMILY WILL DOMINATE OPERATING SYSTEMS
1222: \begin{nrtc}
1223: \item JUST SUPPOSE$\ldots$ (YOU DON'T HAVE TO AGREE!)
1224: \end{nrtc}
1225:
1226: \item THE EMERGING IEEE \unix/-BASED PORTABLE OPERATING SYSTEM
1227: STANDARD (POSIX) WILL PROBABLY BE THE BASELINE FOR THESE SYSTEMS
1228:
1229: \item A FIPS IS UNDER DEVELOPMENT TO BE THE INITIAL SET OF GUIDELINES FOR
1230: PROCUREMENT OF OPERATING SYSTEMS FOR USERS
1231: \end{nrtc}
1232: \end{bwslide}
1233:
1234:
1235: \begin{bwslide}
1236: \ctitle {POSIX}
1237:
1238: \begin{nrtc}
1239: \item CURRENTLY POSIX SPECIFIES ONLY THE \unix/ KERNEL INTERFACE
1240: \begin{nrtc}
1241: \item INFLUENCED MOSTLY BY AT\&T \unix/ (SVID) WITH SOME BERKELEY
1242: ENHANCEMENTS
1243: \end{nrtc}
1244:
1245: \item WORK IS UNDERWAY ON A SHELL AND TOOLS STANDARD
1246:
1247: \item A STANDARD INTERFACE FOR NETWORKING IS NOTABLY MISSING
1248: \end{nrtc}
1249: \end{bwslide}
1250:
1251:
1252: \begin{bwslide}
1253: \ctitle {A MODEST OBSERVATION}
1254:
1255: \begin{nrtc}
1256: \item TCP/IP BECAME WIDESPREAD AFTER IT WAS INCLUDED IN BERKELEY \unix/
1257:
1258: \item QUESTIONS:
1259: \begin{nrtc}
1260: \item CAN WE PUT A REFERENCE VERSION OF THE OSI PROTOCOLS INTO
1261: BERKELEY \unix/?
1262:
1263: \item CAN WE MAKE BERKELEY \unix/ POSIX COMPLIANT?
1264:
1265: \item CAN WE EXTEND POSIX TO DEFINE AN INTERFACE TO NETWORK SERVICES?
1266:
1267: \item CAN WE MAKE THE WORK OPENLY AVAILABLE AND HAVE IT READY FOR
1268: 4.4\bsd/~\unix/?
1269: \end{nrtc}
1270:
1271: \item ANSWER: YES
1272:
1273: \item THIS SHOULD RESULT IN ACCELERATING THE UBIQUITY OF OSI
1274: \end{nrtc}
1275: \end{bwslide}
1276:
1277:
1278: \begin{bwslide}
1279: \ctitle {EXPLANATION}
1280:
1281: \begin{nrtc}
1282: \item A LARGE NUMBER OF THE PIECES ARE ALREADY OPENLY AVAILABLE
1283:
1284: \item SO, THE WORK CONSISTS MAINLY OF:
1285: \begin{nrtc}
1286: \item FILLING IN THE GAPS
1287:
1288: \item INTEGRATING THE COMPONENTS
1289:
1290: \item TESTING THE SYSTEM\\ (INTEROPERABILITY AND CONFORMANCE)
1291: \end{nrtc}
1292:
1293: \item THIS MODEST AMOUNT OF WORK SHOULD RESULT IN ACCELERATING THE UBIQUITY
1294: OF OSI
1295: \end{nrtc}
1296: \end{bwslide}
1297:
1298:
1299: \begin{bwslide}
1300: \ctitle {APPROACH:\\ OSI PROTOCOLS}
1301:
1302: \begin{nrtc}
1303: \item AN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OSI UPPER-LAYERS (ISODE) IS ALREADY AVAILABLE
1304:
1305: \item OTHER ORGANIZATIONS HAVE DEVELOPED OR PLAN TO DEVELOP:
1306: \begin{nrtc}
1307: \item THE LOWER LAYERS
1308:
1309: \item SOME OSI APPLICATIONS
1310: \end{nrtc}
1311:
1312: \item MOST STANDARDS HAVE PROGRESSED FROM DRAFT (DIS) TO FINAL (IS) STATUS
1313: \end{nrtc}
1314: \end{bwslide}
1315:
1316:
1317: \begin{bwslide}
1318: \diagram[p]{figure13}
1319: \end{bwslide}
1320:
1321:
1322: \begin{bwslide}
1323: \diagram[p]{figure14}
1324: \end{bwslide}
1325:
1326:
1327: \begin{bwslide}
1328: \ctitle {THE WORK PLAN}
1329:
1330: \begin{nrtc}
1331: \item UPGRADE ISODE AND OTHER OSI APPLICATIONS TO FINAL (IS) STATUS
1332:
1333: \item INTEGRATE OTHER OSI APPLICATIONS INTO ISODE
1334:
1335: \item PERFORM INTEROPERABILITY TESTING ON OSInet
1336:
1337: \item PERFORM CONFORMANCE TESTING WITH COS
1338: \end{nrtc}
1339: \end{bwslide}
1340:
1341:
1342: \begin{bwslide}
1343: \ctitle {APPROACH:\\ POSIX COMPLIANCE}
1344:
1345: \begin{nrtc}
1346: \item MINOR WORK TO MODIFY THE BERKELEY \unix/ KERNEL TO SUPPORT THE POSIX
1347: STANDARD
1348:
1349: \item PERFORM CONFORMANCE TESTING WITH NBS
1350:
1351: \item ISODE AND OSI APPLICATIONS WILL BE CONVERTED TO USE THE POSIX
1352: INTERFACE AS APPLICABLE
1353: \end{nrtc}
1354: \end{bwslide}
1355:
1356:
1357: \begin{bwslide}
1358: \ctitle {APPROACH:\\ POSIX NETWORK SERVICE}
1359:
1360: \begin{nrtc}
1361: \item A /usr/group COMMITTEE WAS FORMED OVER A YEAR AGO
1362:
1363: \item U.C.~BERKELEY (AND FRIENDS) WILL EXAMINE THE OUTPUT OF THIS
1364: GROUP AND EITHER:
1365: \begin{nrtc}
1366: \item ADOPT THIS INTERFACE (IF ACCEPTED BY THE POSIX COMMITTEE), OR
1367:
1368: \item SUBMIT A NEW DRAFT PROPOSAL TO THE POSIX COMMITTEE
1369: \end{nrtc}
1370: \end{nrtc}
1371: \end{bwslide}
1372:
1373:
1374: \begin{bwslide}
1375: \ctitle {SCHEDULE}
1376:
1377: \begin{nrtc}
1378: \item WOULD YOU BELIEVE 18~CALENDAR-MONTHS?
1379:
1380: \item ACTUALLY 120~MAN-MONTHS%
1381: \footnote{You may have read Brooks' {\em The Mythical Man-Month}.}
1382: \end{nrtc}
1383: \end{bwslide}
1384:
1385:
1386: \begin{bwslide}
1387: \part* {HOST-INTERFACE ISSUES}\bf
1388:
1389: \begin{nrtc}
1390: \item WHICH IS BETTER SOCKETS OR TLI?
1391: \end{nrtc}
1392: \end{bwslide}
1393:
1394:
1395: \begin{bwslide}
1396: \ctitle {BERKELEY SOCKETS}
1397:
1398: \begin{nrtc}
1399: \item NOT REALLY A GOOD FIT FOR THE OSI TRANSPORT SERVICE
1400: \begin{nrtc}
1401: \item ADDRESSES TOO SMALL
1402:
1403: \item NO MECHANISM TO PASS INITIAL USER DATA
1404:
1405: \item NO MECHANISM FOR MARKING TSDU BOUNDARIES
1406:
1407: \item NO WAY TO DISCONNECT WITHOUT FIRST ACCEPTING
1408: \end{nrtc}
1409:
1410: \item THERE ARE TWO APPROACHES TO SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS
1411: \end{nrtc}
1412: \end{bwslide}
1413:
1414:
1415: \begin{bwslide}
1416: \ctitle {APPROACH ONE:\\ MINOR SURGERY AND COMPROMISE}
1417:
1418: \begin{nrtc}
1419: \item BUMP UP ADDRESS SIZE
1420:
1421: \item IGNORE INITIAL USER DATA (SESSION DOESN'T USE IT)
1422:
1423: \item ADD TWO NEW SYSCALLS FOR READ/WRITE OF (PARTIAL) TSDUs
1424:
1425: \item IGNORE DISCONNECT PROBLEM
1426: \end{nrtc}
1427: \end{bwslide}
1428:
1429:
1430: \begin{bwslide}
1431: \ctitle {APPROACH TWO:\\ ADD A NEW SOCKET ABSTRACTION}
1432:
1433: \begin{nrtc}
1434: \item FOR SunLink OSI, SMI ADDED ``EVENT'' SOCKETS
1435:
1436: \item AFTER THE INITIAL socket AND bind SYSCALLS, ALL FURTHER COMMUNICATIONS
1437: ARE DONE BY PASSING MESSAGES (SERVICE REQUESTS) USING SENDMSG/RECVMSG
1438: \begin{nrtc}
1439: \item ALL SYSCALL PARAMETERS USED AS BEFORE, EXCEPT
1440:
1441: \item OLD ADDRESS PARAMETER IS A POINTER TO A SERVICE REQUEST BLOCK
1442: CONTAINING, e.g., QOS PARAMETERS
1443: \end{nrtc}
1444:
1445: \item THE ACCEPT SYSCALL SIMPLY RETURNS THE ADDRESS OF THE HOST REQUESTING
1446: A CONNECTION
1447: \begin{nrtc}
1448: \item USE RECVMSG TO FIND OUT ABOUT THE T-CONNECT.INDICATION
1449:
1450: \item USE SENDMSG TO DO EITHER T-CONNECT.RESPONSE OR
1451: T-DISCONNECT.REQUEST
1452: \end{nrtc}
1453: \end{nrtc}
1454: \end{bwslide}
1455:
1456:
1457: \begin{bwslide}
1458: \ctitle {SOME EXPERIENCE WITH EVENT SOCKETS}
1459:
1460: \begin{nrtc}
1461: \item THE ISODE INTERFACE TO SunLink OSI IS THE ``REFERENCE'' MODULE
1462: FOR OTHER (FUTURE) TP4 INTERFACES FOR ISODE
1463:
1464: \item EVENT SOCKETS ARE GENERAL ENOUGH TO SUPPORT A KERNEL-LEVEL SESSION
1465: \begin{nrtc}
1466: \item SMI HAS DONE THIS, BUT ONLY WITH A MINIMAL SESSION
1467:
1468: \item A REAL KERNEL-RESIDENT SESSION SHOULD SUPPORT ALL FUNCTIONAL
1469: UNITS
1470: \end{nrtc}
1471:
1472: \item HOWEVER, I WORRY ABOUT LOSING THE FLEXIBILITY OF THE TRANSPORT SWITCH
1473: \begin{nrtc}
1474: \item THIS IS AN OPEN QUESTION
1475: \end{nrtc}
1476: \end{nrtc}
1477: \end{bwslide}
1478:
1479:
1480: \begin{bwslide}
1481: \ctitle {WHAT ABOUT TLI?}
1482:
1483: \begin{nrtc}
1484: \item TLI WAS DESIGNED A FEW YEARS AFTER BERKELEY SOCKETS, AND WITH OSI
1485: SPECIFICALLY AS THE MODEL
1486:
1487: \item HENCE, TLI DOESN'T SUFFER FROM THE OSI-RELATED LIMITATIONS AFFLICTING
1488: BERKELEY SOCKETS
1489:
1490: \item WRITING THE TLI DRIVER FOR ISODE WAS A BIT TRICKY AS
1491: \begin{nrtc}
1492: \item TLI HAS ITS OWN SET OF PROBLEMS!
1493: \end{nrtc}
1494: \end{nrtc}
1495: \end{bwslide}
1496:
1497:
1498: \begin{bwslide}
1499: \ctitle {PROBLEMS WITH TLI}
1500:
1501: \begin{nrtc}
1502: \item NO WAY TO DETERMINE ADDRESSES ASSOCIATED WITH AN ENDPOINT
1503: \begin{nrtc}
1504: \item PERHAPS THIS IS JUST COSMETIC
1505: \end{nrtc}
1506:
1507: \item NO SCATTER/GATHER ARRAY SUPPORT
1508: \begin{nrtc}
1509: \item APPLICATIONS TAKE A \underline{BIG} PERFORMANCE HIT
1510: \end{nrtc}
1511: (REALLY A SVR3 CRITICISM)
1512:
1513: \item ALTHOUGH INCOMING CONNECTIONS CAN BE DISCONNECTED WITHOUT BEING
1514: ACCEPTED, THE WAY TLI HANDLES MULTIPLE INCOMING CONNECTIONS IS BROKEN!
1515: \begin{nrtc}
1516: \item DEPENDING ON HOW ONE DISPATCHES INCOMING CONNECTIONS,
1517: IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A CHILD PROCESS TO ``LOCK UP'' THE ENDPOINT
1518: USED BY THE PARENT FOR LISTENING
1519: \end{nrtc}
1520: \end{nrtc}
1521: \end{bwslide}
1522:
1523:
1524: \begin{bwslide}
1525: \part* {SUMMARY}\bf
1526:
1527: \begin{nrtc}
1528: \item ISODE PROVIDES A RICH ENVIRONMENT FOR BUILDING OSI APPLICATIONS
1529: (AND STUDYING THE UPPER LAYERS OF OSI)
1530:
1531: \item ISODE IS THE FOUNDATION OF A PROJECT TO MAKE OSI UBIQUITOUS WHICH
1532: \begin{nrtc}
1533: \item USES 4.4\bsd/~\unix/ AS A PLATFORM, AND
1534:
1535: \item OFFERS A COMPLETE REFERENCE IMPLEMENTATION IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN
1536: \end{nrtc}
1537: \end{nrtc}
1538: \end{bwslide}
1539:
1540:
1541: \end{document}
This archive runs on limited infrastructure. Preserving old code on modern bandwidth. Automated agents are requested to crawl responsibly.