![[BACK]](/cvsweb/icons/back.gif){kind=icon}
Return to isode2.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 / isode2|
Return to isode2.tex CVS log | Up to [CSRG BSD Unix] / 43BSDReno / contrib / isode-beta / doc / isode2 |
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 {RECENT DEVELOPMENTS WITH OSI}
17: \author {Marshall T.~Rose\\ The Wollongong Group, Inc.}
18: \date {May 23, 1988}
19: \maketitlepage
20:
21:
22: \begin{bwslide}
23: \part* {AGENDA}\bf
24:
25: \begin{description}
26: \item[PART I:] OSI: MOTIVATION AND STATUS REPORT
27:
28: \item[PART II:] STRATEGIES FOR TRANSITION/COEXISTENCE
29:
30: \item[PART III:] THE ISO DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT
31: \end{description}
32: \end{bwslide}
33:
34:
35: \begin{bwslide}
36: \part {OSI: MOTIVATION AND STATUS REPORT}
37:
38: \begin{nrtc}
39: \item THE STATUS QUO
40:
41: \item THE UPPER-LAYER ARCHITECTURE
42:
43: \item THE LOWER-LAYER ARCHITECTURE
44: \end{nrtc}
45: \end{bwslide}
46:
47:
48: \begin{bwslide}
49: \part* {THE STATUS QUO}\bf
50:
51: \begin{nrtc}
52: \item OSI STANDARDS AND VENDOR AGREEMENTS ARE FINALLY REACHING STABLE STATUS
53:
54: \item THE GOSIP WILL PROVIDE THE INITIAL DEMAND FOR OSI IN THE U.S.
55:
56: \item HOWEVER, THE TECHNOLOGY STILL REQUIRES REFINEMENT AND TUNING
57: \begin{nrtc}
58: \item CURRENT OSI OFFERINGS ARE REALLY CLOSER TO EXPERIMENTS THAN TO
59: PRODUCTS
60:
61: \item MOST ARE ALSO SPECIFIC TO MAP/TOP
62: \end{nrtc}
63: \end{nrtc}
64: \end{bwslide}
65:
66:
67: \begin{bwslide}
68: \ctitle {GOSIP}
69:
70: \begin{nrtc}
71: \item A (SOON-TO-BE) FEDERAL INFORMATION PROCESSING STANDARD
72:
73: \item PROPOSED TO ENABLE USERS TO SPECIFY AND PROCURE
74: \begin{nrtc}
75: \item INTEROPERABLE
76:
77: \item MULTI-VENDOR
78:
79: \item OFF-THE-SHELF
80: \end{nrtc}
81: COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS PRODUCTS
82:
83: \item THE \dod/:
84: \begin{nrtc}
85: \item IS ADOPTING GOSIP AS A CO-STANDARD WITH TCP/IP
86:
87: \item INTENDS (IN APPROX.~TWO YEARS) TO SPECIFY GOSIP AS THE
88: \underline{ONLY} STANDARD FOR NON-PROPRIETARY, INTEROPERABLE
89: COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS
90: \end{nrtc}
91: \end{nrtc}
92: \end{bwslide}
93:
94:
95: \begin{bwslide}
96: \ctitle {NORTHROP RESEARCH AND\\ TECHNOLOGY CENTER:\\ JANUARY, 1986}
97:
98: \begin{nrtc}
99: \item THE AUTOMATION SCIENCES LABORATORY WAS INTERESTED IN SOLVING CERTAIN
100: PROBLEMS IN THE FACTORY AUTOMATION AREA
101:
102: \item AN ``AFTER-HOURS'' PROJECT WAS STARTED TO LOOK INTO THE APPLICABILITY
103: OF MIXING OSI AND TCP/IP TECHNOLOGIES
104: \end{nrtc}
105: \end{bwslide}
106:
107:
108: \begin{bwslide}
109: \ctitle {(OBLIGATORY SLIDE SHOWING)\\ THE 7--LAYER STACK}
110:
111: \vskip.5in
112: \diagram[p]{figure1}
113: \end{bwslide}
114:
115:
116: \begin{bwslide}
117: \part* {THE UPPER-LAYER ARCHITECTURE}\bf
118:
119: \begin{nrtc}
120: \item THE UPPER LAYERS OF OSI APPEARED TO BE A RICH PLAYGROUND
121:
122: \item WE WANTED TO SEE HOW USEFUL THE UPPER LAYERS REALLY WERE
123: \end{nrtc}
124: \end{bwslide}
125:
126:
127: \begin{bwslide}
128: \ctitle {THE UPPER-LAYER ARCHITECTURE (cont.)}
129:
130: \begin{nrtc}
131: \item BY ``UPPER-LAYER'' WE MEAN EVERYTHING ABOVE TRANSPORT:
132: \begin{nrtc}
133: \item THE APPLICATION-SPECIFICS OF HOW THE NETWORK IS USED
134: \end{nrtc}
135:
136: \item UNLIKE OTHER ARCHITECTURES, THE SAME UPPER-LAYERS ARE USED
137: REGARDLESS OF THE APPLICATION
138:
139: \item WHAT DIFFERS IS THE ACTUAL FUNCTIONALITY USED BY THE APPLICATION
140: \end{nrtc}
141: \end{bwslide}
142:
143:
144: \begin{bwslide}
145: \ctitle {THE UPPER-LAYER ARCHITECTURE (cont.)}
146:
147: \vskip.15in
148: \diagram[p]{figure2}
149: \end{bwslide}
150:
151:
152: \begin{bwslide}
153: \ctitle {THE OSI APPLICATION LAYER}
154:
155: \begin{nrtc}
156: \item MANY STANDARD SERVICE ELEMENTS
157: \begin{nrtc}
158: \item ASSOCIATION CONTROL
159:
160: \item REMOTE OPERATIONS
161:
162: \item RELIABLE TRANSFER
163:
164: \item COMMITMENT, CONCURRENCY AND RECOVERY
165:
166: \item DIRECTORY SERVICES
167: \end{nrtc}
168:
169: \item ABSTRACT SYNTAX NOTATION ONE (ASN.1)
170: \end{nrtc}
171: \end{bwslide}
172:
173:
174: \begin{bwslide}
175: \ctitle {APPLICATION USE OF UPPER-LAYER SERVICES}
176:
177: \vskip.5in
178: \diagram[p]{figure3}
179: \end{bwslide}
180:
181:
182: \begin{bwslide}
183: \ctitle {APPLICATION SERVICE ELEMENTS}
184:
185: \begin{nrtc}
186: \item A USEFUL MECHANISM FOR DIVIDING RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ``TOTAL''
187: APPLICATION PROTOCOL
188:
189: \item PROMOTES ``REUSE'' OF APPLICATION LAYER FACILITIES
190: \end{nrtc}
191: \end{bwslide}
192:
193:
194: \begin{bwslide}
195: \ctitle {ABSTRACT SYNTAX NOTATION ONE (ASN.1)}
196:
197: \begin{nrtc}
198: \item UNIVERSAL LANGUAGE TO DESCRIBE DATA WITH STRONG TYPING
199:
200: \item (TOO) RICH, EXTENSIBLE SYNTAX
201:
202: \item USEFUL FOR SPECIFICATION OF NEW PROTOCOLS
203: \begin{nrtc}
204: \item ``CLEAR-TO-READ'' SPECIFICATIONS (ha!)
205:
206: \item NOT TIED TO MACHINE-ORIENTED STRUCTURES AND RESTRICTIONS
207: \end{nrtc}
208:
209: \item REPRESENTATION CURRENTLY USED BY ALL OSI APPLICATIONS
210: \end{nrtc}
211: \end{bwslide}
212:
213:
214: \begin{bwslide}
215: \ctitle {EXAMPLE:\\ FTAM USE OF LOWER-LAYER SERVICES}
216:
217: \vskip.5in
218: \diagram[p]{figure4}
219: \end{bwslide}
220:
221:
222: \begin{bwslide}
223: \ctitle {ONLY ONE LITTLE PROBLEM$\ldots$}
224:
225: \begin{nrtc}
226: \item HOW TO RUN THE OSI UPPER-LAYERS IN A TCP/IP-BASED NETWORK?
227:
228: \item A SOLUTION IS OFFERED BY LAYERING
229: \begin{nrtc}
230: \item THE OSI TRANSPORT \underline{SERVICE} IS VERY SIMPLE
231:
232: \item CAN WE PROVIDE AN EMULATION OF THAT SERVICE USING TCP?
233: \end{nrtc}
234: \end{nrtc}
235: \end{bwslide}
236:
237:
238: \begin{bwslide}
239: \ctitle {SERVICE EMULATOR AT TRANSPORT}
240:
241: \vskip.5in
242: \diagram[p]{figure5}
243: \end{bwslide}
244:
245:
246: \begin{bwslide}
247: \ctitle {THE OSI TRANSPORT SERVICE}
248:
249: \begin{nrtc}
250: \item ALTHOUGH THE SERVICE IS VERY SIMPLE, THERE ARE ACTUALLY FIVE DIFFERENT
251: ISO PROTOCOLS WHICH CAN BE USED (TP0$\ldots$TP4)
252:
253: \item PROTOCOLS CAN BE DIVIDED INTO TWO CLASSES, BASED ON THE UNDERLYING
254: NETWORK SERVICE
255: \begin{nrtc}
256: \item A CONNECTION-ORIENTED NETWORK SERVICE (CONS), e.g., X.25
257:
258: \item A CONNECTIONLESS-MODE NETWORK SERVICE (CLNS), e.g., CLNP
259: \end{nrtc}
260: \end{nrtc}
261: \end{bwslide}
262:
263:
264: \begin{bwslide}
265: \ctitle {OSI TRANSPORT SERVICES\\ ON TOP OF THE DoD TCP}
266:
267: \begin{nrtc}
268: \item IDEA: TAKE THE SIMPLEST PROTOCOL (TP0) AND DEFINE A MAPPING ONTO
269: THE DoD TCP
270:
271: \item{} [RFC983], PUBLISHED IN APRIL OF 1986, WAS OUR FIRST ATTEMPT AT THIS
272:
273: \item TWO VERSIONS AND 13 MONTHS LATER, [RFC1006] GOT IT RIGHT, TELLING
274: ``HOW TO SPEAK TP0 OVER THE TCP''
275:
276: \item NOTE: THIS APPROACH IS NOT UNIQUE TO TCP/IP-BASED NETWORKS!
277: \end{nrtc}
278: \end{bwslide}
279:
280:
281: \begin{bwslide}
282: \ctitle {OSI TRANSPORT SERVICES\\ ON TOP OF THE DoD TCP (cont.)}
283:
284: \vskip.25in
285: \diagram[p]{figure6}
286: \end{bwslide}
287:
288:
289: \begin{bwslide}
290: \part* {LOWER LAYER INFRASTRUCTURE}\bf
291:
292: \begin{nrtc}
293: \item THE LOWER LAYERS ARE EVERYTHING AT TRANSPORT AND BELOW
294:
295: \item THE LOWER LAYERS ARE VERY SIMILAR TO OTHER ARCHITECTURES IN USE
296: TODAY, e.g., TCP/IP, XNS
297:
298: \item HOWEVER, DUE TO CULTURE CLASH, TWO DIFFERENT SCHEMES FOR END-TO-END
299: SERVICE ARE POSSIBLE
300:
301: \item ATTEMPTING TO ``HARMONIZE'' THESE APPROACHES LED TO ONE OF THE UGLIEST
302: STANDARDS (THE IONL) EVER WRITTEN!
303: \end{nrtc}
304: \end{bwslide}
305:
306:
307: \begin{bwslide}
308: \ctitle {LOWER LAYER INFRASTRUCTURE}
309:
310: \vskip.5in
311: \diagram[p]{figure18}
312: \end{bwslide}
313:
314:
315: \begin{bwslide}
316: \ctitle {SOME TRANSPORT CONCERNS}
317:
318: \begin{nrtc}
319: \item ONLY RECENTLY HAVE PERFORMANCE ISSUES IN TP4--LIKE PROTOCOLS BECOME
320: WELL UNDERSTOOD (e.g., SLOW START IN THE TCP)
321:
322: \item THE TP4 SPECIFICATION IS VERY NAIVE IN MANY OF THE ALGORITHMS THAT IT
323: USES
324:
325: \item THIS CAN LEAD TO SLUGGISH PERFORMANCE ON LANS (ALREADY OBSERVED)
326: AND CONGESTION COLLAPSE IN INTERNETS (WIDELY PREDICTED)
327:
328: \item SOLUTION: IMPLEMENT TCP-ISH ALGORITHMS IN TP4
329:
330: \item OTHER COMPLAINTS: CHECKSUM IS TOO SLOW TO DO IN SOFTWARE, BUT PROTOCOL
331: IS TOO COMPLICATED TO DO IN HARDWARE!
332: \end{nrtc}
333: \end{bwslide}
334:
335:
336: \begin{bwslide}
337: \part* {CONCLUSIONS}\bf
338:
339: \begin{nrtc}
340: \item THE GOSIP IS PROVIDING THE INITIAL DEMAND FOR OSI IN THE U.S.
341:
342: \item ENOUGH AREAS HAVE BEEN STANDARDIZED TO DEPLOY EXPERIMENTAL SYSTEMS
343:
344: \item STILL NEED LOTS OF OPERATIONAL EXPERIENCE BEFORE HIGH-QUALITY
345: PRODUCTS CAN BE BUILT
346: \end{nrtc}
347: \end{bwslide}
348:
349:
350: \begin{bwslide}
351: \part {STRATEGIES FOR TRANSITION/COEXISTENCE}\bf
352:
353: \begin{nrtc}
354: \item THERE ARE MANY TCP/IP NETWORKS TODAY; THERE WILL BE MORE TOMORROW
355:
356: \item BY THE TIME OSI BECOMES A WORTHWHILE OPERATIONAL ALTERNATIVE,
357: THERE WILL BE MANY MORE TCP/IP NETWORKS THAN THERE ARE TODAY!
358:
359: \item PROBLEM: HOW TO PROTECT INSTALLED BASE?
360:
361: \item PROBLEM: HOW TO TRANSITION GRACEFULLY?
362: \end{nrtc}
363: \end{bwslide}
364:
365:
366: \begin{bwslide}
367: \ctitle {METRICS FOR COMPARISON}
368:
369: \begin{nrtc}
370: \item CAN JUDGE A TRANSITION/COEXISTENCE SCHEME USING DIFFERENT
371: CRITERIA
372:
373: \item HERE ARE A FEW
374: \begin{nrtc}
375: \item PERFORMANCE:
376: \begin{nrtc}
377: \item THROUGHPUT
378:
379: \item RESPONSE
380: \end{nrtc}
381:
382: \item FLEXIBILITY:
383: \begin{nrtc}
384: \item RANGE OF APPLICABILITY
385: \end{nrtc}
386:
387: \item TRANSPARENCY:
388: \begin{nrtc}
389: \item USAGE CONTINUITY
390:
391: \item SEAMLESS USER INTERFACE
392: \end{nrtc}
393:
394: \item PERVASIVENESS:
395: \begin{nrtc}
396: \item MANAGEABILITY
397: \end{nrtc}
398: \end{nrtc}
399: \end{nrtc}
400: \end{bwslide}
401:
402:
403: \begin{bwslide}
404: \ctitle {FOUR CANDIDATES}
405:
406: \begin{nrtc}
407: \item PROTOCOL-BASED APPROACHES
408: \begin{nrtc}
409: \item DUAL STACK
410:
411: \item APPLICATION GATEWAYS
412: \end{nrtc}
413:
414: \item SERVICE-BASED APPROACHES
415: \begin{nrtc}
416: \item TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES
417:
418: \item NETWORK TUNNELS
419: \end{nrtc}
420: \end{nrtc}
421: \end{bwslide}
422:
423:
424: \begin{bwslide}
425: \part* {DUAL STACK}\bf
426:
427: \begin{nrtc}
428: \item PUT BOTH PROTOCOL SUITES IN ALL HOSTS
429:
430: \item NICE WORK, IF YOU CAN GET IT
431: \end{nrtc}
432: \end{bwslide}
433:
434:
435: \begin{bwslide}
436: \ctitle {DUAL STACK (cont.)}
437:
438: \vskip.5in
439: \diagram[p]{figure16}
440: \end{bwslide}
441:
442:
443: \begin{bwslide}
444: \ctitle {SCORECARD}
445:
446: \begin{nrtc}
447: \item PERFORMANCE: NO DEGRADATION
448:
449: \item FLEXIBILITY: NOT REALLY; HAVE TO ADD EACH APPLICATION TO EACH HOST
450:
451: \item TRANSPARENCY:
452: \begin{nrtc}
453: \item ASSUMING REMOTE SYSTEM SUPPORTS AT LEAST ONE OF THE PROTOCOL
454: STACKS, THEN HIGH TRANSPARENCY BY USING COMMON SERVICE
455: INTERFACE
456: \end{nrtc}
457:
458: \item PERVASIVENESS:
459: \begin{nrtc}
460: \item BOTH END- AND INTERMEDIATE-SYSTEMS MUST RUN BOTH PROTOCOLS
461:
462: \item INTRODUCES ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS AS THERE ARE NOW TWO
463: LOGICAL NETWORKS
464: \begin{nrtc}
465: \item MANAGEMENT OF BOTH \underline{PLUS} CONTENTION BETWEEN THEM
466: \end{nrtc}
467: \end{nrtc}
468: \end{nrtc}
469: \end{bwslide}
470:
471:
472: \begin{bwslide}
473: \part* {APPLICATION GATEWAYS}\bf
474:
475: \begin{nrtc}
476: \item A WELL-KNOWN, BUT LITTLE-UNDERSTOOD TECHNOLOGY
477: \begin{nrtc}
478: \item USED IN MESSAGE HANDLING QUITE A BIT\\
479: (AND MOST ARE QUITE TERRIBLE)
480:
481: \item NOT REALLY USED OTHERWISE
482: \end{nrtc}
483:
484: \item THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF A-GWY's:
485: \begin{nrtc}
486: \item SAME APPLICATION PROTOCOL,\\
487: BUT DIFFERENT UNDERLYING LAYERS
488:
489: \item DIFFERENT APPLICATION PROTOCOLS,\\
490: UNDERLYING LAYERS UNIMPORTANT
491: \end{nrtc}
492:
493: \item WE'LL CONSIDER ONLY THE LATTER TYPE
494: \end{nrtc}
495: \end{bwslide}
496:
497:
498: \begin{bwslide}
499: \ctitle {APPLICATION GATEWAYS (cont.)}
500:
501: \vskip.5in
502: \diagram[p]{figure7}
503: \end{bwslide}
504:
505:
506: \begin{bwslide}
507: \ctitle {SCORECARD}
508:
509: \begin{nrtc}
510: \item PERFORMANCE: USUALLY POOR, BUT ACCEPTABLE FOR STORE-AND-FORWARD
511: APPLICATIONS
512: \begin{nrtc}
513: \item TYPICALLY ALSO INTRODUCES ADDITIONAL NETWORK TRAFFIC
514: \end{nrtc}
515:
516: \item FLEXIBILITY: NONE; EACH A-GWY IS A SPECIAL-PURPOSE SOFTWARE BOX
517:
518: \item TRANSPARENCY:
519: \begin{nrtc}
520: \item TO SERVICE: OFTEN LOSES SIGNIFICANT FUNCTIONALITY
521:
522: \item TO USERS: POSSIBLE, BUT NOT LIKELY (e.g., IN AN FTAM/FTP A-GWY,
523: USERS EMBED HOSTNAMES IN FILENAMES)
524: \end{nrtc}
525:
526: \item PERVASIVENESS:
527: \begin{nrtc}
528: \item REQUIRES NO END-SYSTEM MODIFICATION
529:
530: \item MAY INTRODUCE ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS
531: \end{nrtc}
532: \end{nrtc}
533: \end{bwslide}
534:
535:
536: \begin{bwslide}
537: \part* {A NEW APPROACH}\bf
538:
539: \begin{nrtc}
540: \item PREDICTION: BY THE TIME OSI IS A WORTHWHILE ALTERNATIVE,
541: TCP/IP-BASED NETWORKS WILL ALREADY OFFER A MIX OF SERVICES:
542: \begin{nrtc}
543: \item SUCH AS FTAM AND MHS, IN ADDITION TO FTP AND SMTP
544: \end{nrtc}
545:
546: \item OBVIOUSLY, ONE METHOD OF DOING THIS IS TO USE THE [RFC1006] APPROACH
547: \end{nrtc}
548: \end{bwslide}
549:
550:
551: \begin{bwslide}
552: \ctitle {OBSERVATION}
553:
554: \begin{nrtc}
555: \item GIVEN THE ABOVE ASSUMPTION, IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT:
556: \begin{nrtc}
557: \item THE TWO COMMUNITIES WILL BE USING THE SAME APPLICATIONS (OSI),
558: AND
559:
560: \item ONLY THE UNDERLYING ``TS-STACK'' WILL DIFFER BETWEEN THE TWO:
561: \begin{nrtc}
562: \item IN THE OSI COMMUNITY: TP4/CLNP/$\ldots$
563:
564: \item IN THE TCP COMMUNITY: [RFC1006]/TCP/IP/$\ldots$
565: \end{nrtc}
566: \end{nrtc}
567:
568: \item THIS LEADS US TO POSTULATE AN INTERESTING COEXISTENCE
569: STRATEGY:
570: \begin{nrtc}
571: \item LET'S RUN OSI APPLICATIONS BETWEEN THE TWO COMMUNITIES
572: \end{nrtc}
573:
574: \item IN A SENSE, THIS IS A HYBRID OF THE TWO PREVIOUS APPROACHES,
575: INTENDED TO MINIMIZE THE DISADVANTAGES OF EACH
576: \begin{nrtc}
577: \item SAME APPLICATION PROTOCOL,\\
578: BUT DIFFERENT UNDERYLING LAYERS
579: \end{nrtc}
580: \end{nrtc}
581: \end{bwslide}
582:
583:
584: \begin{bwslide}
585: \ctitle {TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES}
586:
587: \begin{nrtc}
588: \item INTRODUCE A TRANSPORT ENTITY CALLED THE ``TS-BRIDGE''
589:
590: \item THE TS-BRIDGE ``COPIES'' SERVICE PRIMITIVES FROM ONE COMMUNITY TO THE
591: OTHER, e.g.:
592: \begin{nrtc}
593: \item UPON RECEIVING A T-CONNECT.INDICATION PRIMITIVE FROM ONE
594: TS-STACK,
595:
596: \item IT ISSUES A T-CONNECT.REQUEST PRIMITIVE TO THE OTHER TS-STACK
597: \end{nrtc}
598:
599: \item POTENTIAL PROBLEMS:
600: \begin{nrtc}
601: \item THE TS-BRIDGE MAINTAINS STATE AS TO THE EXISTING CONNECTIONS
602:
603: \item TWO CHECKSUMS, AND NEITHER REALLY END-TO-END
604: \end{nrtc}
605: \end{nrtc}
606: \end{bwslide}
607:
608:
609: \begin{bwslide}
610: \ctitle {TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES (cont.)}
611:
612: \vskip.5in
613: \diagram[p]{figure8}
614: \end{bwslide}
615:
616:
617: \begin{bwslide}
618: \ctitle {TRANSPARENT USE OF TS-BRIDGES}
619:
620: \begin{nrtc}
621: \item BY JUDICIOUS USE OF DIRECTORY SERVICES, SELECTION OF THE
622: TS-BRIDGE CAN BE MADE TRANSPARENT ON BOTH ENDPOINTS
623:
624: \item CONSIDER A ``TYPICAL'' PRESENTATION ADDRESS:
625: \[\begin{tabular}{ll}
626: network address:& CLNP 470005001700$\ldots$5301\\
627: transport selector:& 1\\
628: session selector:& ``FTAM''\\
629: presentation selector:& null
630: \end{tabular}\]
631:
632: \item A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT ENTRY IS RETURNED FOR HOSTS IN THE
633: OPPOSITE COMMUNITY:
634: \[\begin{tabular}{ll}
635: network address:& ts-bridge's network address\\
636: transport selector:& \begin{tabular}[t]{ll}
637: network address:&
638: CLNP 47 $\ldots$\\
639: transport selector:& 1
640: \end{tabular}\\
641: session selector:& ``FTAM''\\
642: presentation selector:& null
643: \end{tabular}\]
644: \end{nrtc}
645: \end{bwslide}
646:
647:
648: \begin{bwslide}
649: \ctitle {ANOTHER PROBLEM SOLVED:\\ ISO CONS versus CLNS}
650:
651: \begin{nrtc}
652: \item IN GENERAL, THE TS-BRIDGE SHOWS HOW TO PERFORM
653: ``IMPEDENCE MATCHING'' BETWEEN TWO PROTOCOLS WHICH OFFER THE
654: SAME SERVICE INTERFACE, e.g., OUR USE IS:
655: \begin{nrtc}
656: \item PROTOCOLS: TP4/CLNP AND TP0/TCP
657:
658: \item SERVICE: OSI TRANSPORT SERVICE
659: \end{nrtc}
660:
661: \item THIS IS SUSPICIOUSLY SIMILAR TO THE ISO TP4/CLNS vs. TP0/CONS PROBLEM:
662: \begin{nrtc}
663: \item PROTOCOLS: TP4/CLNP AND TP0/X.25
664:
665: \item SERVICE: OSI TRANSPORT SERVICE
666: \end{nrtc}
667:
668: \item THE TS-BRIDGE WILL ALSO WORK IN THIS ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT
669: MEANINGFUL LOSS OF GENERALITY:
670: \begin{nrtc}
671: \item EXPEDITED DATA IS NEGOTIATED AWAY, AND
672:
673: \item INITIAL USER DATA RESULTS IN DISCONNECT
674: \end{nrtc}
675: \end{nrtc}
676: \end{bwslide}
677:
678:
679: \begin{bwslide}
680: \ctitle {AN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TS-BRIDGE}
681:
682: \begin{nrtc}
683: \item USING ISODE, WOLLONGONG HAS IMPLEMENTED A TS-BRIDGE
684:
685: \item AT UNIFORUM IN FEBRUARY, 1987, THE
686: \begin{nrtc}
687: \item TP4/CLNP to TP0/TCP
688: \end{nrtc}
689: ``IMPEDENCE MATCHING'' WAS DEMONSTRATED
690:
691: \item CURRENTLY, ALL THREE TS-STACKS
692: \begin{nrtc}
693: \item TP4/CLNP, TP0/X.25, TP0/TCP
694: \end{nrtc}
695: ARE BEING BRIDGED (ON A SINGLE HOST) AT WOLLONGONG
696: \end{nrtc}
697: \end{bwslide}
698:
699:
700: \begin{bwslide}
701: \ctitle {SCORECARD}
702:
703: \begin{nrtc}
704: \item PERFORMANCE: FAIR; WHEN TS-BRIDGE IS MADE INTO A KERNEL-RESIDENT
705: STREAMS MODULE IT SHOULD IMPROVE DRAMATICALLY
706:
707: \item FLEXIBILITY: HIGH; INDEPENDENT OF ANY APPLICATION
708:
709: \item TRANSPARENCY: TOTAL
710:
711: \item PERVASIVENESS:
712: \begin{nrtc}
713: \item END-SYSTEMS MUST RUN ``NEW'' PROTOCOLS
714:
715: \item MAY INTRODUCE ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS (WHICH SHOULD BE SOLVED
716: DYNAMICALLY BY DIRECTORY SERVICES)
717: \end{nrtc}
718: \end{nrtc}
719: \end{bwslide}
720:
721:
722: \begin{bwslide}
723: \part* {NETWORK TUNNELS}\bf
724:
725: \begin{nrtc}
726: \item IDEA: ENCAPSULATE CLNP INSIDE OF IP, TREATING IP AS SIMPLY A DATA LINK
727: PROTOCOL
728:
729: \item NS-TUNNEL PERFORMS AS A ROUTER, REMOVING ONE DATA LINK HEADER AND
730: ADDING ANOTHER
731:
732: \item REQUIRES COMMON HIGHER-LEVEL PROTOCOLS (TRANSPORT AND ABOVE) ON BOTH
733: END-SYSTEMS, BUT DOES NOT REQUIRE ALL INTERVENTING ROUTERS TO USE THE
734: SAME NETWORK PROTOCOL
735: \end{nrtc}
736: \end{bwslide}
737:
738:
739: \begin{bwslide}
740: \ctitle {NETWORK TUNNELS (cont.)}
741:
742: \vskip.5in
743: \diagram[p]{figure17}
744: \end{bwslide}
745:
746:
747: \begin{bwslide}
748: \ctitle {INTERESTING FEATURES}
749:
750: \begin{nrtc}
751: \item NO STATE MAINTAINED BY NS-TUNNEL
752:
753: \item A TRUE END-TO-END CHECKSUM
754:
755: \item THE TCP END-SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION CHOICES ARE SIMILAR TO NETBIOS OVER
756: TCP [RFC1001/1002]
757: \end{nrtc}
758: \end{bwslide}
759:
760:
761: \begin{bwslide}
762: \ctitle {SCORECARD}
763:
764: \begin{nrtc}
765: \item PERFORMANCE: NO WORSE THAN TYPICAL CLNP-ROUTER (AND PROBABLY A LOT
766: BETTER TOO!)
767:
768: \item FLEXIBILITY: HIGH (INDEPENDENT OF ANY APPLICATION)
769:
770: \item TRANSPARENCY: TOTAL
771:
772: \item PERVASIVENESS: SOME END-SYSTEMS MUST RUN BOTH TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS
773: \end{nrtc}
774: \end{bwslide}
775:
776:
777: \begin{bwslide}
778: \part* {CONCLUSIONS}\bf
779:
780: \begin{nrtc}
781: \item TCP/IP-BASED NETWORKS WILL OFFER OSI-STYLE SERVICES
782:
783: \item COEXISTENCE IN THE SHORT TERM:
784: \begin{nrtc}
785: \item TS-BRIDGE MINIMIZES SOFTWARE INVESTMENT
786: \end{nrtc}
787:
788: \item COEXISTENCE IN THE LONG TERM:
789: \begin{nrtc}
790: \item NS-TUNNEL MAXIMIZES PERFORMANCE
791: \end{nrtc}
792:
793: \item IF/WHEN THERE ARE NO MORE TCP/IP-BASED NETWORKS, THEN THE
794: COEXISTANCE PERIOD IS OVER, AND TRANSITION IS A NON-ISSUE!
795: \end{nrtc}
796: \end{bwslide}
797:
798:
799: \begin{bwslide}
800: \part {THE ISO DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT}\bf
801:
802: \begin{nrtc}
803: \item CURRENT DISTRIBUTION
804:
805: \item WHERE IN USE
806:
807: \item THE APPLICATIONS COOKBOOK
808:
809: \item THE OSI-POSIX PROJECT
810: \end{nrtc}
811: \end{bwslide}
812:
813:
814: \begin{bwslide}
815: \ctitle {WHAT IS ISODE?}
816:
817: \begin{nrtc}
818: \item THE ISO DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT
819:
820: \item AN OPENLY AVAILABLE IMPLEMENATION OF THE UPPER LAYERS OF OSI?
821:
822: \item A BASIS FOR THE TRANSITION TO OSI?
823:
824: \item AN EXERCISE IN MEGA-CODING?
825:
826: \item A PLAYGROUND FOR ``THE PIED-PIPER OF OSI''?
827: \end{nrtc}
828: \end{bwslide}
829:
830:
831: \begin{bwslide}
832: \part* {CURRENT DISTRIBUTION}\bf
833:
834: \begin{nrtc}
835: \item STATUS: OPENLY AVAILABLE UNDER AN IMPLICIT ``HOLD HARMLESS'' CLAUSE
836:
837: \item CURRENT RELEASE: 3.0
838: \begin{nrtc}
839: \item AVAILABLE OCTOBER 15, 1987
840: \end{nrtc}
841:
842: \item CURRENT DISTRIBUTION: 3.6(BETA)
843: \begin{nrtc}
844: \item AVAILABLE APRIL 15, 1988
845: \end{nrtc}
846:
847: \item DISTRIBUTION EITHER VIA POSTAL MAIL OR ARPAnet FTP
848: \begin{nrtc}
849: \item SOURCE: \~{}6MB
850:
851: \item DOC: 4~VOLUME USER'S MANUAL (\~{}600~PAGES)
852:
853: \item DISTRIBUTION SITES: US, UK, AND AU
854:
855: \item PRICE: \~{}200~US DOLLARS
856: \end{nrtc}
857: \end{nrtc}
858: \end{bwslide}
859:
860:
861: \begin{bwslide}
862: \ctitle {LANGUAGES AND OPERATING SYSTEMS}
863:
864: \begin{nrtc}
865: \item CODED ENTIRELY IN C FOR \unix/
866: \begin{nrtc}
867: \item REQUIRES NO KERNEL MODIFICATIONS
868: \end{nrtc}
869:
870: \item KNOWN PORTS FOR BERKELEY \unix/ (4.2 and 4.3):
871: \begin{nrtc}
872: \item VAXen, SUNs, Pyramids, RTs, etc.
873: \end{nrtc}
874:
875: \item KNOWN PORTS FOR AT\&T \unix/ (SVR2 and SVR3):
876: \begin{nrtc}
877: \item SGI, 3Bs, 386s, RT (AIX)
878: \end{nrtc}
879:
880: \item MS-DOS (CURRENTLY CLIENT SIDE ONLY)
881: \begin{nrtc}
882: \item PORT DONE BY HP IN THE UK
883:
884: \item DON'T KNOW STATUS OF CODE
885: \end{nrtc}
886: \end{nrtc}
887: \end{bwslide}
888:
889:
890: \begin{bwslide}
891: \ctitle {APPLICATION ARCHITECTURE}
892:
893: \begin{nrtc}
894: \item A (NEARLY) COMPLETE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE UPPER LAYERS
895:
896: \item CURRENTLY DIS LEVEL
897: \begin{nrtc}
898: \item IN PROCESS OF BEING UPGRADED TO IS
899: \end{nrtc}
900:
901: \item ALIGNED WITH THE U.S.~GOSIP
902: \end{nrtc}
903: \end{bwslide}
904:
905:
906: \begin{bwslide}
907: \ctitle {THE APPLICATION ENVIRONMENT}
908:
909: \vskip.5in
910: \diagram[p]{figure9}
911: \end{bwslide}
912:
913:
914: \begin{bwslide}
915: \ctitle {AN ALTERNATE ENVIRONMENT:\\ MHS ARCHITECTURE (c.~1984)}
916:
917: \vskip.5in
918: \diagram[p]{figure10}
919: \end{bwslide}
920:
921:
922: \begin{bwslide}
923: \ctitle {APPLICATIONS}
924:
925: \begin{nrtc}
926: \item FILE TRANSFER, ACCESS AND MANAGEMENT (FTAM)
927:
928: \item ISODE MISCELLANY SERVICE
929: \begin{nrtc}
930: \item e.g., FINGER, QUOTE-OF-THE-DAY, etc.
931: \end{nrtc}
932:
933: \item PLUS NUMEROUS ``DEMO'' PROGRAMS
934: \begin{nrtc}
935: \item e.g., IMAGE SERVICE, PASSWORD LOOKUP, etc.
936: \end{nrtc}
937: \end{nrtc}
938: \end{bwslide}
939:
940:
941: \begin{bwslide}
942: \ctitle {THE TRANSPORT SWITCH}
943:
944: \begin{nrtc}
945: \item DECIDES WHICH TS-STACK TO USE FOR A CONNECTION
946:
947: \item FOR TP0:
948: \begin{nrtc}
949: \item TCP (SOCKETS)
950:
951: \item X.25 (SEVERAL INTERFACES, MOSTLY SOCKETS)
952: \end{nrtc}
953:
954: \item FOR TP4:
955: \begin{nrtc}
956: \item TWG's PROPRIETARY WIN/ISO (TLI)
957:
958: \item SunLink OSI (EVENT SOCKETS)
959: \end{nrtc}
960:
961: \item EXPERIENCE SHOWS IT IS FAIRLY EASY TO ADD A NEW TS-STACK TO THE SWITCH
962: \end{nrtc}
963: \end{bwslide}
964:
965:
966: \begin{bwslide}
967: \part* {WHERE IN USE}\bf
968:
969: \begin{nrtc}
970: \item HARD TO TELL HOW MANY COPIES ARE IN USE (DUE TO AVAILABILITY VIA
971: ARPAnet FTP)
972:
973: \item AT LAST COUNT, ABOUT 350~DIFFERENT SITES USING ISODE
974:
975: \item IN ADDITION TO SITES IN NORTH AMERICA:
976: \begin{nrtc}
977: \item WESTERN EUROPE
978:
979: \item MIDDLE EAST (ISRAEL)
980:
981: \item SOUTH PACIFIC (AUSTRALIA)
982:
983: \item ASIA (SOUTH KOREA, JAPAN)
984: \end{nrtc}
985: \end{nrtc}
986: \end{bwslide}
987:
988:
989: \begin{bwslide}
990: \ctitle {PROJECTS}
991:
992: \begin{nrtc}
993: \item THREE PILOT PROJECTS IN OSI INFRASTRUCTURE IN EUROPE
994: \begin{nrtc}
995: \item A NATIONAL PROJECT IN THE UK
996:
997: \item A NATIONAL PROJECT IN WEST GERMANY (DFN)
998:
999: \item A PROJECT FOR RARE (THE EUROPEAN ACADEMIC COMMUNITY)
1000: \end{nrtc}
1001:
1002: \item IN USE BY DIFFERENT CONFORMANCE TESTING ORGANIZATIONS
1003: \begin{nrtc}
1004: \item THE CORPORATION FOR OPEN SYSTEMS IN THE US
1005:
1006: \item THE NATIONAL COMPUTER CENTRE IN THE UK
1007: \end{nrtc}
1008:
1009: \item ENDORSED BY THE NSF (DNCRI)
1010: \end{nrtc}
1011: \end{bwslide}
1012:
1013:
1014: \begin{bwslide}
1015: \part* {THE APPLICATIONS COOKBOOK}\bf
1016:
1017: \begin{nrtc}
1018: \item TOOLS TO FACILITATE DEVELOPMENT OF APPLICATIONS ARE CRITICAL
1019:
1020: \item IDEA IS TO DEVELOP TOOLS TO AUTOMATE USE OF OSI REMOTE OPERATIONS
1021: SERVICE AS A GENERAL REMOTE PROCEDURE CALL FACILITY
1022:
1023: \item ECMA TR/31: REMOTE OPERATIONS -- CONCEPTS, NOTATION AND
1024: CONNECTION-ORIENTED MAPPINGS (SECTIONS 1--4)
1025: \end{nrtc}
1026: \end{bwslide}
1027:
1028:
1029: \begin{bwslide}
1030: \ctitle {REMOTE OPERATIONS SERVICE (ROS)}
1031:
1032: \begin{nrtc}
1033: \item STANDARDIZED MECHANISM FOR SPECIFYING TRANSACTIONS
1034:
1035: \item EMPLOYS POWER OF ASN.1
1036:
1037: \item USED IN MANY INTERESTING OSI APPLICATIONS
1038: \begin{nrtc}
1039: \item MESSAGE HANDLING SYSTEMS
1040:
1041: \item DIRECTORY SERVICES
1042:
1043: \item NETWORK MANAGEMENT
1044:
1045: \item REMOTE DATABASE ACCESS
1046: \end{nrtc}
1047:
1048: \item CURRENTLY CONNECTION-ORIENTED, BUT CONNECTIONLESS-MODE IS UNDER STUDY
1049: \end{nrtc}
1050: \end{bwslide}
1051:
1052: \begin{bwslide}
1053: \ctitle {GENERAL ORGANIZATION}
1054:
1055: \begin{nrtc}
1056: \item AT COMPILE-TIME:
1057: \begin{nrtc}
1058: \item USE RO-SPECIFICATION TO GENERATE SUPPORT FACILITIES
1059: \end{nrtc}
1060:
1061: \item AT RUN-TIME:
1062: \begin{nrtc}
1063: \item USE DIRECTORY SERVICES TO LOCATE/REGISTER NETWORK SERVICES
1064:
1065: \item USE ASSOCIATION CONTROL TO BIND/UNBIND APPLICATIONS
1066:
1067: \item USE REMOTE OPERATIONS TO INVOKE TRANSACTIONS
1068: \end{nrtc}
1069: \end{nrtc}
1070: \end{bwslide}
1071:
1072:
1073: \begin{bwslide}
1074: \ctitle {STATIC (COMPILE-TIME) ORGANIZATION}
1075:
1076: \vskip.15in
1077: \diagram[p]{figure11}
1078: \end{bwslide}
1079:
1080:
1081: \begin{bwslide}
1082: \ctitle {DYNAMIC (RUN-TIME) ORGANIZATION}
1083:
1084: \vskip.15in
1085: \diagram[p]{figure12}
1086: \end{bwslide}
1087:
1088:
1089: \begin{bwslide}
1090: \ctitle {CURRENT STATUS}
1091:
1092: \begin{nrtc}
1093: \item STATIC AND DYNAMIC FACILITIES
1094: \begin{nrtc}
1095: \item ALL TOOLS/LIBRARIES ARE DEVELOPED AND MOST RECENT UPGRADES
1096: HAVE NEARLY COMPLETED BETA TESTING
1097:
1098: \item ``REAL'' (DYNAMIC) DIRECTORY SERVICES IS CURRENTLY TOO
1099: IMMATURE (BUT NOT FOR LONG!)
1100: \end{nrtc}
1101:
1102: \item AN ``APPLICATIONS COOKBOOK'' WAS WRITTEN AS VOLUME~4 OF THE USER'S
1103: MANUAL
1104: \end{nrtc}
1105: \end{bwslide}
1106:
1107:
1108: \begin{bwslide}
1109: \part* {OSI-POSIX PROJECT}\bf
1110:
1111: \begin{nrtc}
1112: \item IF WE BELIEVE THAT:
1113: \begin{nrtc}
1114: \item OSI/ISO WILL EVENTUALLY DOMINATE COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS, AND
1115:
1116: \item THE U.S.~GOVERNMENT OSI PROFILE WILL BE THE INITIAL SET OF
1117: GUIDELINES FOR OSI PROCUREMENT
1118: \end{nrtc}
1119:
1120: \item WHAT CAN WE DO TO ACCELERATE THE PROCESS?
1121:
1122: \item NOTE: AFTER THE ENTERPRISE EVENT, MAP/TOP MAY DROP FROM
1123: MAINSTREAM OSI
1124: \end{nrtc}
1125: \end{bwslide}
1126:
1127:
1128: \begin{bwslide}
1129: \ctitle {GOSIP (REFRESHER)}
1130:
1131: \begin{nrtc}
1132: \item A (SOON-TO-BE) FEDERAL INFORMATION PROCESSING STANDARD
1133:
1134: \item PROPOSED TO ENABLE USERS TO SPECIFY AND PROCURE
1135: \begin{nrtc}
1136: \item INTEROPERABLE
1137:
1138: \item MULTI-VENDOR
1139:
1140: \item OFF-THE-SHELF
1141: \end{nrtc}
1142: COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS PRODUCTS
1143:
1144: \item THE \dod/:
1145: \begin{nrtc}
1146: \item IS ADOPTING GOSIP AS A CO-STANDARD WITH TCP/IP
1147:
1148: \item INTENDS (IN APPROX.~TWO YEARS) TO SPECIFY GOSIP AS THE
1149: \underline{ONLY} STANDARD FOR NON-PROPRIETARY, INTEROPERABLE
1150: COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS
1151: \end{nrtc}
1152: \end{nrtc}
1153: \end{bwslide}
1154:
1155:
1156: \begin{bwslide}
1157: \ctitle {A DIGRESSION:\\ OPERATING SYSTEMS}
1158:
1159: \begin{nrtc}
1160: \item LET US SUPPOSE THAT THE \unix/ FAMILY WILL DOMINATE OPERATING SYSTEMS
1161:
1162: \item THE EMERGING IEEE \unix/-BASED PORTABLE OPERATING SYSTEM
1163: STANDARD (POSIX) WILL PROBABLY BE THE BASELINE FOR THESE SYSTEMS
1164:
1165: \item A FIPS IS UNDER DEVELOPMENT TO BE THE INITIAL SET OF GUIDELINES FOR
1166: PROCUREMENT OF OPERATING SYSTEMS FOR USERS
1167: \end{nrtc}
1168: \end{bwslide}
1169:
1170:
1171: \begin{bwslide}
1172: \ctitle {POSIX}
1173:
1174: \begin{nrtc}
1175: \item CURRENTLY POSIX SPECIFIES ONLY THE \unix/ KERNEL INTERFACE
1176: \begin{nrtc}
1177: \item INFLUENCED MOSTLY BY AT\&T \unix/ (SVID) WITH SOME BERKELEY
1178: ENHANCEMENTS
1179: \end{nrtc}
1180:
1181: \item WORK IS UNDERWAY ON A SHELL AND TOOLS STANDARD
1182:
1183: \item A STANDARD INTERFACE FOR NETWORKING IS NOTABLY MISSING
1184: \end{nrtc}
1185: \end{bwslide}
1186:
1187:
1188: \begin{bwslide}
1189: \ctitle {A MODEST OBSERVATION}
1190:
1191: \begin{nrtc}
1192: \item TCP/IP BECAME WIDESPREAD AFTER IT WAS INCLUDED IN BERKELEY \unix/
1193:
1194: \item QUESTIONS:
1195: \begin{nrtc}
1196: \item CAN WE PUT A REFERENCE VERSION OF THE OSI PROTOCOLS INTO
1197: BERKELEY \unix/?
1198:
1199: \item CAN WE MAKE BERKELEY \unix/ POSIX COMPLIANT?
1200:
1201: \item CAN WE EXTEND POSIX TO DEFINE AN INTERFACE TO NETWORK SERVICES?
1202:
1203: \item CAN WE MAKE THE WORK OPENLY AVAILABLE AND HAVE IT READY FOR
1204: 4.4\bsd/~\unix/?
1205: \end{nrtc}
1206:
1207: \item ANSWER: YES
1208:
1209: \item THIS SHOULD RESULT IN ACCELERATING THE UBIQUITY OF OSI
1210: \end{nrtc}
1211: \end{bwslide}
1212:
1213:
1214: \begin{bwslide}
1215: \ctitle {EXPLANATION}
1216:
1217: \begin{nrtc}
1218: \item A LARGE NUMBER OF THE PIECES ARE ALREADY OPENLY AVAILABLE
1219:
1220: \item SO, THE WORK CONSISTS MAINLY OF:
1221: \begin{nrtc}
1222: \item FILLING IN THE GAPS
1223:
1224: \item INTEGRATING THE COMPONENTS
1225:
1226: \item TESTING THE SYSTEM\\ (INTEROPERABILITY AND CONFORMANCE)
1227: \end{nrtc}
1228:
1229: \item THIS MODEST AMOUNT OF WORK SHOULD RESULT IN ACCELERATING THE UBIQUITY
1230: OF OSI
1231: \end{nrtc}
1232: \end{bwslide}
1233:
1234:
1235: \begin{bwslide}
1236: \ctitle {APPROACH:\\ OSI PROTOCOLS}
1237:
1238: \begin{nrtc}
1239: \item AN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE OSI UPPER-LAYERS (ISODE) IS ALREADY AVAILABLE
1240:
1241: \item OTHER ORGANIZATIONS HAVE DEVELOPED OR PLAN TO DEVELOP:
1242: \begin{nrtc}
1243: \item THE LOWER LAYERS
1244:
1245: \item SOME OSI APPLICATIONS
1246: \end{nrtc}
1247:
1248: \item MOST STANDARDS HAVE PROGRESSED FROM DRAFT (DIS) TO FINAL (IS) STATUS
1249: \end{nrtc}
1250: \end{bwslide}
1251:
1252:
1253: \begin{bwslide}
1254: \diagram[p]{figure13}
1255: \end{bwslide}
1256:
1257:
1258: \begin{bwslide}
1259: \diagram[p]{figure14}
1260: \end{bwslide}
1261:
1262:
1263: \begin{bwslide}
1264: \ctitle {THE WORK PLAN}
1265:
1266: \begin{nrtc}
1267: \item UPGRADE ISODE AND OTHER OSI APPLICATIONS TO FINAL (IS) STATUS
1268:
1269: \item INTEGRATE OTHER OSI APPLICATIONS INTO ISODE
1270:
1271: \item PERFORM INTEROPERABILITY TESTING ON OSInet
1272:
1273: \item PERFORM CONFORMANCE TESTING WITH COS
1274: \end{nrtc}
1275: \end{bwslide}
1276:
1277:
1278: \begin{bwslide}
1279: \ctitle {APPROACH:\\ POSIX COMPLIANCE}
1280:
1281: \begin{nrtc}
1282: \item MINOR WORK TO MODIFY THE BERKELEY \unix/ KERNEL TO SUPPORT THE POSIX
1283: STANDARD
1284:
1285: \item PERFORM CONFORMANCE TESTING WITH NBS
1286:
1287: \item ISODE AND OSI APPLICATIONS WILL BE CONVERTED TO USE THE POSIX
1288: INTERFACE AS APPLICABLE
1289: \end{nrtc}
1290: \end{bwslide}
1291:
1292:
1293: \begin{bwslide}
1294: \ctitle {APPROACH:\\ POSIX NETWORK SERVICE}
1295:
1296: \begin{nrtc}
1297: \item A /usr/group COMMITTEE WAS FORMED OVER A YEAR AGO
1298:
1299: \item U.C.~BERKELEY (AND FRIENDS) WILL EXAMINE THE OUTPUT OF THIS
1300: GROUP AND EITHER:
1301: \begin{nrtc}
1302: \item ADOPT THIS INTERFACE (IF ACCEPTED BY THE POSIX COMMITTEE), OR
1303:
1304: \item SUBMIT A NEW DRAFT PROPOSAL TO THE POSIX COMMITTEE
1305: \end{nrtc}
1306: \end{nrtc}
1307: \end{bwslide}
1308:
1309:
1310: \begin{bwslide}
1311: \ctitle {SCHEDULE}
1312:
1313: \begin{nrtc}
1314: \item WOULD YOU BELIEVE 18~CALENDAR-MONTHS?
1315:
1316: \item ACTUALLY 120~MAN-MONTHS%
1317: \footnote{You may have read Brooks' {\em The Mythical Man-Month}.}
1318: \end{nrtc}
1319: \end{bwslide}
1320:
1321:
1322: \begin{bwslide}
1323: \part* {SUMMARY}\bf
1324:
1325: \begin{nrtc}
1326: \item ISODE PROVIDES A RICH ENVIRONMENT FOR BUILDING OSI APPLICATIONS
1327: (AND STUDYING THE UPPER LAYERS OF OSI)
1328:
1329: \item ISODE IS THE FOUNDATION OF A PROJECT TO MAKE OSI UBIQUITOUS WHICH
1330: \begin{nrtc}
1331: \item USES 4.4\bsd/~\unix/ AS A PLATFORM, AND
1332:
1333: \item OFFERS A COMPLETE REFERENCE IMPLEMENTATION IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN
1334: \end{nrtc}
1335: \end{nrtc}
1336: \end{bwslide}
1337:
1338:
1339: \end{document}
This archive runs on limited infrastructure. Preserving old code on modern bandwidth. Automated agents are requested to crawl responsibly.