|
|
1.1 ! root 1: % run this through LaTeX with the appropriate wrapper ! 2: ! 3: \dotopic{2} ! 4: \begin{bwslide} ! 5: \part {TRANSITION AND\\ COEXISTENCE\\ WITH TCP/IP} ! 6: \end{bwslide} ! 7: \doparts ! 8: ! 9: ! 10: \begin{bwslide} ! 11: \part* {OUTLINE}\bf ! 12: ! 13: \begin{description} ! 14: \item[PART I:] MOTIVATION ! 15: ! 16: \item[PART II:] BACKGROUND ! 17: ! 18: \item[PART III:] PROTOCOL-BASED APPROACHES ! 19: ! 20: \item[PART IV:] SERVICE-BASED APPROACHES ! 21: ! 22: \item[PART V:] EXAMPLES ! 23: \end{description} ! 24: \end{bwslide} ! 25: ! 26: ! 27: \begin{bwslide} ! 28: \part {MOTIVATION}\bf ! 29: ! 30: \begin{nrtc} ! 31: \item THERE ARE MANY TCP/IP NETWORKS TODAY; THERE WILL BE MORE TOMORROW ! 32: ! 33: \item BY THE TIME OSI BECOMES A WORTHWHILE OPERATIONAL ALTERNATIVE, ! 34: THERE WILL BE MANY MORE TCP/IP NETWORKS THAN THERE ARE TODAY! ! 35: ! 36: \item PROBLEM: HOW TO PROTECT INSTALLED BASE? ! 37: ! 38: \item PROBLEM: HOW TO TRANSITION GRACEFULLY? ! 39: \end{nrtc} ! 40: \end{bwslide} ! 41: ! 42: ! 43: \begin{bwslide} ! 44: \ctitle {GROWTH OF TCP/IP} ! 45: ! 46: \begin{nrtc} ! 47: \item SALES OF TCP/IP-BASED TECHNOLOGY ! 48: \begin{nrtc} ! 49: \item PARTICULARLY IN EUROPE ! 50: \end{nrtc} ! 51: CONTINUES TO GROW ! 52: ! 53: \item SEVERAL TECHNICAL AND MARKET ASPECTS CONTRIBUTE TO THIS PHENOMENA: ! 54: \begin{nrtc} ! 55: \item SUPERIORITY OF TCP/IP IN LOWER-LAYER CONNECTIVITY ! 56: ! 57: \item MATURITY OF TCP/IP PRODUCTS\\ (e.g., RANGE OF PLATFORMS) ! 58: \end{nrtc} ! 59: ! 60: \item ALTHOUGH OSI WILL DOMINATE, IT DOESN'T YET ! 61: ! 62: \item HENCE, TCP/IP IS BECOMING MORE FIRMLY ENTRENCHED ! 63: \end{nrtc} ! 64: \end{bwslide} ! 65: ! 66: ! 67: \begin{bwslide} ! 68: \ctitle {FEAR AND LOATHING IN THE MARKET} ! 69: ! 70: \begin{nrtc} ! 71: \item F.U.D. IN THE MARKETPLACE: ! 72: \begin{quote}\em ! 73: ``All marketing is fear, uncertainty, and doubt.''\\ \raggedleft ! 74: -- Einar Stefferud, Network Management Associates ! 75: \end{quote} ! 76: ! 77: \item WHAT THE VENDORS SAY: ! 78: \begin{quote}\em ! 79: ``$\ldots$ protect your investment while assuring a path to an OSI ! 80: future.''\\ \raggedleft ! 81: -- Vendor A ! 82: \end{quote} ! 83: AND ! 84: \begin{quote}\em ! 85: ``$\ldots$ plans for a smooth, painless guaranteed migration to OSI standards ! 86: as they are approved.''\\ \raggedleft ! 87: --Vendor B ! 88: \end{quote} ! 89: AND ! 90: \begin{quote}\em ! 91: ``Once you've scrapped your existing production networks, ! 92: come to us for OSI. ! 93: It will be wonderful!''\\ \raggedleft ! 94: --Vendor C ! 95: \end{quote} ! 96: \end{nrtc} ! 97: \end{bwslide} ! 98: ! 99: ! 100: \begin{bwslide} ! 101: \ctitle {THE SAD TRUTH} ! 102: ! 103: \begin{quote}\em ! 104: ``You can't win, and you can't quit, but you \underline{can} reduce the ! 105: pain.''\\ \raggedleft ! 106: -- Marshall Rose, NYSERNet, Inc. ! 107: \end{quote} ! 108: \end{bwslide} ! 109: ! 110: ! 111: \begin{bwslide} ! 112: \part {BACKGROUND}\bf ! 113: ! 114: \begin{nrtc} ! 115: \item CONCEPTS ! 116: ! 117: \item TERMINOLOGY ! 118: ! 119: \item HISTORY ! 120: ! 121: \item METRICS FOR COMPARISON ! 122: \end{nrtc} ! 123: \end{bwslide} ! 124: ! 125: ! 126: \begin{bwslide} ! 127: \ctitle {THE FUNDAMENTAL ASSUMPTION} ! 128: ! 129: \begin{nrtc} ! 130: \item TCP/IP IS HERE TODAY, WIDELY INSTALLED, AND USEFUL ! 131: ! 132: \item OSI WILL EVENTUALLY REPLACE TCP/IP AS THE OFF-THE-SHELF TECHNOLOGY FOR ! 133: BUILDING INTEROPERABLE SYSTMS ! 134: ! 135: \item BOTH WILL BE SIMULTANEOUSLY WIDESPREAD FOR QUITE SOME TIME ! 136: \begin{nrtc} ! 137: \item DURING WHICH OSI WILL GAIN DOMINANCE ! 138: \end{nrtc} ! 139: \end{nrtc} ! 140: \end{bwslide} ! 141: ! 142: ! 143: \begin{bwslide} ! 144: \part* {CONCEPTS}\bf ! 145: ! 146: \begin{nrtc} ! 147: \item TRANSITION: ! 148: \begin{nrtc} ! 149: \item TO MOVE FROM ONE PROTOCOL SUITE TO ANOTHER ! 150: \end{nrtc} ! 151: ! 152: \item COEXISTENCE: ! 153: \begin{nrtc} ! 154: \item TO LIVE TOGETHER WITHOUT HOSTILITY OR CONFLICT DESPITE ! 155: DIFFERENCES ! 156: \end{nrtc} ! 157: ! 158: \item MIGRATION: ! 159: \begin{nrtc} ! 160: \item TO MOVE BACK AND FORTH, AS THE SEASONS CHANGE ! 161: \end{nrtc} ! 162: \end{nrtc} ! 163: \end{bwslide} ! 164: ! 165: ! 166: \begin{bwslide} ! 167: \ctitle {MAPPINGS} ! 168: ! 169: \begin{nrtc} ! 170: \item TRANSITION AND COEXISTENCE CAN BE DESCRIBED BY THE MAPPINGS THEY ! 171: REQUIRE ! 172: ! 173: \item SOME MAPPINGS ARE SIMPLE ! 174: \begin{nrtc} ! 175: \item i.e., SYNTACTIC CHANGES ! 176: \end{nrtc} ! 177: ! 178: \item SOME MAPPINGS ARE COMPLEX ! 179: \begin{nrtc} ! 180: \item i.e., SEMANTIC CHANGES ! 181: \end{nrtc} ! 182: ! 183: \item THE MORE COMPLEX THE MAPPING, THE GREATER THE LOSS OF INFORMATION OR ! 184: INTENT ! 185: \end{nrtc} ! 186: \end{bwslide} ! 187: ! 188: ! 189: \begin{bwslide} ! 190: \part* {TERMINOLOGY}\bf ! 191: ! 192: \begin{nrtc} ! 193: \item WE'LL FAVOR OSI TERMINOLOGY, BUT STILL NEED SOME INTERNET (TCP/IP) ! 194: TERMINOLOGY ! 195: ! 196: \item TWO BASIC TERMS ! 197: \begin{nrtc} ! 198: \item GATEWAY: GENERIC TO ANY LEVEL, COMPLEX ! 199: ! 200: \item BRIDGE: GENERIC TO ANY LEVEL, SIMPLE ! 201: \end{nrtc} ! 202: \end{nrtc} ! 203: \end{bwslide} ! 204: ! 205: ! 206: \begin{bwslide} ! 207: \ctitle {SERVICE SEMANTICS} ! 208: ! 209: \begin{nrtc} ! 210: \item STORE-AND-FORWARD ! 211: \begin{nrtc} ! 212: \item SERVICE SEMANTICS CARRIED MULTI-HOP VIA FORWARDERS ! 213: \end{nrtc} ! 214: ! 215: \item END-TO-END ! 216: \begin{nrtc} ! 217: \item SERVICE SEMANTICS CARRIED FROM ORIGINATOR TO RECIPIENT ! 218: ! 219: \item MAY BE SUPPORTED BY AN UNDERYLING STORE-AND-FORWARD SERVICE ! 220: \end{nrtc} ! 221: \end{nrtc} ! 222: \end{bwslide} ! 223: ! 224: ! 225: \begin{bwslide} ! 226: \ctitle {SERVICE SEMANTICS (cont.)} ! 227: ! 228: \vskip.5in ! 229: \diagram[p]{figureT-3} ! 230: \end{bwslide} ! 231: ! 232: ! 233: \begin{bwslide} ! 234: \ctitle {PROTOCOL SUITE} ! 235: ! 236: \begin{nrtc} ! 237: \item A COLLECTION OF SERVICES AND PROTOCOLS RELATED: ! 238: \begin{nrtc} ! 239: \item ADMINISTRATIVELY, BY AN ORGANIZATION\\ (e.g., ISO/IEC); and, ! 240: ! 241: \item PHILOSOPHICALLY, BY A REFERENCE MODEL\\ (e.g., the OSIRM) ! 242: \end{nrtc} ! 243: ! 244: \item FOR OUR PURPOSES, THERE ARE ONLY TWO: ! 245: \begin{nrtc} ! 246: \item THE OSI SUITE OF PROTOCOLS ! 247: ! 248: \item THE INTERNET SUITE OF PROTOCOLS ! 249: \end{nrtc} ! 250: \end{nrtc} ! 251: \end{bwslide} ! 252: ! 253: ! 254: \begin{bwslide} ! 255: \ctitle {APPLICATIONS} ! 256: ! 257: \begin{nrtc} ! 258: \item APPLICATION CLASS ! 259: \begin{nrtc} ! 260: \item A SET OF APPLICATIONS RELATED TO A PARTICULAR ACTIVITY, ! 261: e.g., FILE TRANSFER, IRREGARDLESS OF PROTOCOL SUITE ! 262: \end{nrtc} ! 263: ! 264: \item APPLICATION INSTANCE ! 265: \begin{nrtc} ! 266: \item A MEMBER OF AN APPLICATION CLASS SPECIFIC TO A PARTICULAR ! 267: PROTOCOL SUITE, e.g., FTAM ! 268: \end{nrtc} ! 269: \end{nrtc} ! 270: \end{bwslide} ! 271: ! 272: ! 273: \begin{bwslide} ! 274: \part* {HISTORY}\bf ! 275: ! 276: \begin{nrtc} ! 277: \item A VERY BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO THE TWO PROTOCOL SUITES ! 278: ! 279: \item WE'LL ATTEMPT TO TAKE A NON-PARTISAN VIEW (ha!) ! 280: \end{nrtc} ! 281: \end{bwslide} ! 282: ! 283: ! 284: \begin{bwslide} ! 285: \ctitle {INTERNET SUITE} ! 286: ! 287: \begin{nrtc} ! 288: \item SPONSORED BY THE U.S.~DoD ! 289: \begin{nrtc} ! 290: \item GREW OUT OF EARLY (D)ARPA RESEARCH INTO SURVIVABLE NETWORKS ! 291: \end{nrtc} ! 292: BASIS FROM THE DoD INTERNET ARCHITECTURE MODEL ! 293: ! 294: \item SPECIFIED IN ``REQUEST FOR COMMENTS'' SERIES (RFCs) AND ! 295: U.S.~MILITARY STANDARDS (MILSTDs) ! 296: ! 297: \item CURRENT GENERATION PRIMARILY BASED ON ! 298: \begin{nrtc} ! 299: \item CONNECTION-ORIENTED TRANSPORT SERVICE, ! 300: PROVIDED BY THE TCP; AND, ! 301: ! 302: \item CONNECTIONLESS-MODE NETWORK SERVICE, ! 303: PROVIDED BY THE IP ! 304: \end{nrtc} ! 305: ! 306: \item MAJOR EMPHASIS ON CONNECTIVITY OF DIVERSE SUB-NETWORKS ! 307: \begin{nrtc} ! 308: \item EXCELLENT RESEARCH CONTINUES, TO THIS DAY, ON THESE ISSUES ! 309: \end{nrtc} ! 310: \end{nrtc} ! 311: \end{bwslide} ! 312: ! 313: ! 314: \begin{bwslide} ! 315: \ctitle {INTERNET SUITE (cont.)} ! 316: ! 317: \begin{nrtc} ! 318: \item SEVERAL PRODUCTION APPLICATIONS ! 319: \begin{nrtc} ! 320: \item SIMPLE MAIL TRANSFER PROTOCOL (SMTP) ! 321: ! 322: \item FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL (FTP) ! 323: ! 324: \item TELNET (VIRTUAL TERMINAL PROTOCOL) ! 325: ! 326: \item DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM (DNS) ! 327: \end{nrtc} ! 328: ALL OF WHICH ARE RATHER SIMPLE ! 329: ! 330: \item APPLICATIONS CONTAIN THEIR OWN IMPLICIT SESSION AND PRESENTATION ! 331: MECHANISMS ! 332: ! 333: \item NOT SURPRISING, CONSIDERING THAT THESE APPLICATIONS ARE ALL BASED ON ! 334: 15~YEAR OLD MODELS! ! 335: \end{nrtc} ! 336: \end{bwslide} ! 337: ! 338: ! 339: \begin{bwslide} ! 340: \ctitle {INTERNET PROTOCOLS} ! 341: ! 342: \vskip.5in ! 343: \diagram[p]{figureT-4} ! 344: \end{bwslide} ! 345: ! 346: ! 347: \begin{bwslide} ! 348: \ctitle {OSI SUITE} ! 349: ! 350: \begin{nrtc} ! 351: \item SPONSORED BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY ! 352: \begin{nrtc} ! 353: \item IN PARTICULAR THE ISO ! 354: \end{nrtc} ! 355: BASIS FROM THE OSI REFERENCE MODEL (OSIRM) ! 356: ! 357: \item SPECIFIED IN ``STANDARDS'' (ISO/IEC) AND RECOMMENDATIONS (CCITT) ! 358: ! 359: \item BASED ON ! 360: \begin{nrtc} ! 361: \item CONNECTION-ORIENTED TRANSPORT SERVICE, ! 362: PROVIDED BY ONE OF FIVE DIFFERENT TPs; DEPENDING ON ! 363: ! 364: \item THE NETWORK SERVICE AVAILABLE (CONS or CLNS) ! 365: \end{nrtc} ! 366: ! 367: \item DIFFICULT TO IDENTIFY THE ``MAJOR'' EMPHASIS ! 368: \end{nrtc} ! 369: \end{bwslide} ! 370: ! 371: ! 372: \begin{bwslide} ! 373: \ctitle {OSI SUITE (cont.)} ! 374: ! 375: \begin{nrtc} ! 376: \item SEVERAL INTERESTING APPLICATIONS ! 377: \begin{nrtc} ! 378: \item MESSAGE HANDLING SYSTEMS (MHS) ! 379: ! 380: \item FILE TRANSFER, ACCESS AND MANAGEMENT (FTAM) ! 381: ! 382: \item VIRTUAL TERMINAL (VT) ! 383: ! 384: \item DIRECTORY SERVICES (DS) ! 385: \end{nrtc} ! 386: ! 387: \item APPLICATIONS EVOLVING QUITE HEAVILY OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS ! 388: ! 389: \item MUCH MORE AMBITIOUS THAN THEIR INTERNET COUNTERPARTS ! 390: \end{nrtc} ! 391: \end{bwslide} ! 392: ! 393: ! 394: \begin{bwslide} ! 395: %%%\ctitle {OSI PROTOCOLS} ! 396: ! 397: %%%\vskip.25in ! 398: \diagram[p]{figureT-5} ! 399: \end{bwslide} ! 400: ! 401: ! 402: \begin{bwslide} ! 403: \ctitle {A BRIEF COMPARISON} ! 404: ! 405: \begin{nrtc} ! 406: \item NOTE THAT CONCERNS DIFFER ! 407: \begin{nrtc} ! 408: \item NETWORK USERS: APPLICATION-LEVEL FUNCTIONALITY ! 409: ! 410: \item NETWORK ADMINISTRATORS: NETWORK AND TRANSPORT ISSUES ! 411: \end{nrtc} ! 412: ! 413: \item FOR APPLICATIONS, ONCE IMPLEMENTED, THE OSI SUITE IS SUPERIOR ! 414: ! 415: \item FOR NETWORK/TRANSPORT ISSUES, AT PRESENT, ! 416: THE INTERNET SUITE IS SUPERIOR ! 417: \end{nrtc} ! 418: \end{bwslide} ! 419: ! 420: ! 421: \begin{bwslide} ! 422: \part* {METRICS FOR COMPARISON}\bf ! 423: ! 424: \begin{nrtc} ! 425: \item CAN JUDGE A TRANSITION/COEXISTENCE SCHEME USING DIFFERENT ! 426: CRITERIA ! 427: ! 428: \item THE FOUR WE'LL FOCUS ON ARE ALL SUBJECTIVE; ! 429: \begin{nrtc} ! 430: \item TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS DO NOT EXIST IN A VACUUM ! 431: ! 432: \item THEY MUST BE EVALUATED IN THE CONTEXT OF A TARGET ENVIRONMENT ! 433: \end{nrtc} ! 434: \end{nrtc} ! 435: \end{bwslide} ! 436: ! 437: ! 438: \begin{bwslide} ! 439: \ctitle {METRICS FOR COMPARISON (cont.)} ! 440: ! 441: \begin{nrtc} ! 442: \item PERFORMANCE: ! 443: \begin{nrtc} ! 444: \item THROUGHPUT, LATENCY ! 445: ! 446: \item EFFECT ON OTHER APPLICATIONS ! 447: \end{nrtc} ! 448: ! 449: \item FLEXIBILITY: ! 450: \begin{nrtc} ! 451: \item RANGE OF APPLICABILITY ! 452: \end{nrtc} ! 453: \end{nrtc} ! 454: \end{bwslide} ! 455: ! 456: ! 457: \begin{bwslide} ! 458: \ctitle {METRICS FOR COMPARISON (cont.)} ! 459: ! 460: \begin{nrtc} ! 461: \item TRANSPARENCY: ! 462: \begin{nrtc} ! 463: \item USAGE CONTINUITY ! 464: ! 465: \item SEAMLESS USER INTERFACE ! 466: \end{nrtc} ! 467: ! 468: \item AMENABILITY: ! 469: \begin{nrtc} ! 470: \item MANAGEABILITY ! 471: \end{nrtc} ! 472: \end{nrtc} ! 473: \end{bwslide} ! 474: ! 475: ! 476: \begin{bwslide} ! 477: \ctitle {SEVERAL CANDIDATES} ! 478: ! 479: \begin{nrtc} ! 480: \item PROTOCOL-BASED APPROACHES ! 481: \begin{nrtc} ! 482: \item DUAL STACK ! 483: ! 484: \item APPLICATION GATEWAYS ! 485: ! 486: \item TRANSPORT GATEWAYS ! 487: \end{nrtc} ! 488: ! 489: \item SERVICE-BASED APPROACHES ! 490: \begin{nrtc} ! 491: \item TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES ! 492: ! 493: \item NETWORK TUNNELS ! 494: \end{nrtc} ! 495: ! 496: \item NONE OF THESE TECHNIQUES ARE SPECIFIC TO THE PROBLEM OF ! 497: \begin{nrtc} ! 498: \item INTERNET $\mapsto$ OSI ! 499: \end{nrtc} ! 500: \end{nrtc} ! 501: \end{bwslide} ! 502: ! 503: ! 504: \begin{bwslide} ! 505: \part {PROTOCOL-BASED APPROACHES}\bf ! 506: ! 507: \begin{nrtc} ! 508: \item THE ``STANDARD'' METHODS USED TO INTERCONNECT DIFFERENT ! 509: PROTOCOL STACKS ! 510: ! 511: \item THESE EMPHASIZE THE PROTOCOLS IN EACH STACK ! 512: ! 513: \item HENCE THEY REINFORCE THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN TCP/IP AND OSI ! 514: \end{nrtc} ! 515: \end{bwslide} ! 516: ! 517: ! 518: \begin{bwslide} ! 519: \part* {DUAL STACK}\bf ! 520: ! 521: \begin{nrtc} ! 522: \item PUT BOTH PROTOCOL SUITES IN ALL HOSTS ! 523: ! 524: \item WORKS WELL, IF YOU CAN CHANGE EVERYTHING ON THE NETWORK ! 525: \begin{quote}\em ! 526: ``Nice work, if you can get it.''\\ \raggedleft ! 527: -- Groucho Marx, Monkey Business, Paramount Pictures (1931) ! 528: \end{quote} ! 529: \end{nrtc} ! 530: \end{bwslide} ! 531: ! 532: ! 533: \begin{bwslide} ! 534: \ctitle {DUAL STACK (cont.)} ! 535: ! 536: \vskip.5in ! 537: \diagram[p]{figureT-1} ! 538: \end{bwslide} ! 539: ! 540: ! 541: \begin{bwslide} ! 542: \ctitle {TALKING TO UNI-STACK HOSTS} ! 543: ! 544: \begin{nrtc} ! 545: \item QUESTION: HOW TO DECIDE WHICH APPLICATION INSTANCE, ! 546: \begin{nrtc} ! 547: \item APPL-$\alpha$ OR APPL-$\gamma$, ! 548: \end{nrtc} ! 549: TO USE? ! 550: ! 551: \item TWO ANSWERS: ! 552: \begin{nrtc} ! 553: \item DEPEND ON THE USER TO KNOW AND INVOKE THE RIGHT PROGRAM ! 554: ! 555: \item DEVELOP A GENERIC APPLICATION WHICH SUPPORTS BOTH CLASSES ! 556: \end{nrtc} ! 557: ! 558: \item IN THE LATTER CASE, NEED AN UP-TO-DATE DIRECTORY TO DO THIS RELIABLY ! 559: \end{nrtc} ! 560: \end{bwslide} ! 561: ! 562: ! 563: \begin{bwslide} ! 564: \ctitle {GENERIC APPLICATION INSTANCE} ! 565: ! 566: \vskip.5in ! 567: \diagram[p]{figureT-6} ! 568: \end{bwslide} ! 569: ! 570: ! 571: \begin{bwslide} ! 572: \ctitle {AN IMPLEMENTATION OF DUAL-STACK} ! 573: ! 574: \begin{nrtc} ! 575: \item ENVIRONMENT: \unix/~SVR3 (STREAMS) ! 576: ! 577: \item ACCESS TO LOWER-LAYER PROTOCOLS VIA TRANSPORT LAYER INTERFACE (TLI) ! 578: ! 579: \item NOTE THAT ALTHOUGH TLI PROVIDES A UNIFORM INTERFACE, ! 580: IT DOES NOT PROVIDE A UNIFORM SERVICE: ! 581: \begin{nrtc} ! 582: \item PACKET- vs. STREAM-ORIENTATION ! 583: ! 584: \item GRACEFUL RELEASE ! 585: ! 586: \item EXPEDITED vs. URGENT DATA ! 587: ! 588: \item ADDRESSING ! 589: \end{nrtc} ! 590: \end{nrtc} ! 591: \end{bwslide} ! 592: ! 593: ! 594: \begin{bwslide} ! 595: \ctitle {GENERIC APPLICATION INSTANCE} ! 596: ! 597: \vskip.5in ! 598: \diagram[p]{figureT-11} ! 599: \end{bwslide} ! 600: ! 601: ! 602: \begin{bwslide} ! 603: \ctitle {SCORECARD} ! 604: ! 605: \begin{nrtc} ! 606: \item PERFORMANCE: NO DEGRADATION ! 607: ! 608: \item FLEXIBILITY: GOOD ! 609: ! 610: \item TRANSPARENCY: ! 611: \begin{nrtc} ! 612: \item ASSUMING REMOTE SYSTEM SUPPORTS AT LEAST ONE OF THE PROTOCOL ! 613: STACKS, THEN HIGH TRANSPARENCY BY USING COMMON SERVICE ! 614: INTERFACE ! 615: \end{nrtc} ! 616: ! 617: \item AMENABILITY: ! 618: \begin{nrtc} ! 619: \item BOTH END- AND INTERMEDIATE-SYSTEMS MUST RUN BOTH PROTOCOLS ! 620: ! 621: \item INTRODUCES ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS AS THERE ARE NOW TWO ! 622: LOGICAL NETWORKS ! 623: \begin{nrtc} ! 624: \item MANAGEMENT OF BOTH \underline{PLUS} CONTENTION BETWEEN THEM ! 625: \end{nrtc} ! 626: \end{nrtc} ! 627: \end{nrtc} ! 628: \end{bwslide} ! 629: ! 630: ! 631: \begin{bwslide} ! 632: \part* {APPLICATION GATEWAYS}\bf ! 633: ! 634: \begin{nrtc} ! 635: \item A WELL-KNOWN, BUT LITTLE-UNDERSTOOD TECHNOLOGY ! 636: \begin{nrtc} ! 637: \item USED IN MESSAGE HANDLING QUITE A BIT ! 638: \end{nrtc} ! 639: ! 640: \item MOST ARE QUITE TERRIBLE ! 641: \begin{quote}\em ! 642: ``Sometimes when you try to turn an apple into an orange you get back a ! 643: lemon.''\\ \raggedleft ! 644: -- Michael Padlipsky, The Elements of Networking Style (1985) ! 645: \end{quote} ! 646: \end{nrtc} ! 647: \end{bwslide} ! 648: ! 649: ! 650: \begin{bwslide} ! 651: \ctitle {APPLICATION GATEWAYS (cont.)} ! 652: ! 653: \vskip.5in ! 654: \diagram[p]{figureT-2} ! 655: \end{bwslide} ! 656: ! 657: ! 658: \begin{bwslide} ! 659: \ctitle {IMPERFECT MAPPINGS} ! 660: ! 661: \begin{nrtc} ! 662: \item BECAUSE THEY ARE AT THE HIGHEST LAYER IN THE STACK, ! 663: APPLICATION GATEWAYS TEND TO PERFORM SEMANTIC MAPPINGS ! 664: ! 665: \item THESE ARE ACCOMPANIED BY A LOSS OF INFORMATION ! 666: ! 667: \item SOMETIMES THE LOSS IS ONLY ANNOYING ! 668: \begin{nrtc} ! 669: \item e.g., ``FUNNY LOOKING'' MAIL ADDRESSES ! 670: \end{nrtc} ! 671: ! 672: \item SOMETIMES THE LOSS IS CATASTROPHIC ! 673: \begin{nrtc} ! 674: \item e.g., ROUTING LOOPS ! 675: \end{nrtc} ! 676: \end{nrtc} ! 677: \end{bwslide} ! 678: ! 679: ! 680: \begin{bwslide} ! 681: \ctitle {AN IMPLEMENATION OF APPLICATION-GATEWAY} ! 682: ! 683: \begin{nrtc} ! 684: \item TWO KINDS OF IMPLEMENATIONS ! 685: ! 686: \item STAGING (TRUE STORE-AND-FORWARD): ! 687: \begin{nrtc} ! 688: \item TOP-LEVEL PROTOCOL TRANSACTIONS ARE GROUPED AT THE GATEWAY ! 689: ! 690: \item REQUIRES LOCAL STORAGE, BUT MAY PERMIT BETTER MAPPINGS ! 691: \end{nrtc} ! 692: ! 693: \item IN-SITU (VIRTUAL END-TO-END): ! 694: \begin{nrtc} ! 695: \item NO PROTOCOL TRANSACTIONS ARE GROUPED ! 696: ! 697: \item MAPPINGS ARE ``ON THE FLY''\\ (AND PERHAPS LESS PRECISE) ! 698: ! 699: \item END-TO-END RESPONSE IS FASTER ! 700: \end{nrtc} ! 701: \end{nrtc} ! 702: \end{bwslide} ! 703: ! 704: ! 705: \begin{bwslide} ! 706: \ctitle {INVOKING THE GATEWAY} ! 707: ! 708: \vskip1.5in ! 709: \begin{verbatim} ! 710: % ftp file-gateway ! 711: Name (file-gateway:asterix): obelix@osi-host ! 712: Password: ! 713: \end{verbatim} ! 714: \end{bwslide} ! 715: ! 716: ! 717: \begin{bwslide} ! 718: \ctitle {A STAGING IMPLEMENTATION} ! 719: ! 720: \vskip.5in ! 721: \diagram[p]{figureT-12} ! 722: \end{bwslide} ! 723: ! 724: ! 725: \begin{bwslide} ! 726: \ctitle {AN IN-SITU IMPLEMENTATION} ! 727: ! 728: \vskip.5in ! 729: \diagram[p]{figureT-13} ! 730: \end{bwslide} ! 731: ! 732: ! 733: \begin{bwslide} ! 734: \ctitle {SCORECARD} ! 735: ! 736: \begin{nrtc} ! 737: \item PERFORMANCE: USUALLY POOR, BUT ACCEPTABLE FOR STORE-AND-FORWARD ! 738: APPLICATIONS ! 739: \begin{nrtc} ! 740: \item TYPICALLY ALSO INTRODUCES ADDITIONAL NETWORK TRAFFIC ! 741: \end{nrtc} ! 742: ! 743: \item FLEXIBILITY: NONE; EACH A-GWY IS A SPECIAL-PURPOSE SOFTWARE BOX ! 744: ! 745: \item TRANSPARENCY: ! 746: \begin{nrtc} ! 747: \item TO SERVICE: OFTEN LOSES SIGNIFICANT FUNCTIONALITY ! 748: ! 749: \item TO USERS: POSSIBLE, BUT NOT LIKELY (e.g., IN AN FTAM/FTP A-GWY, ! 750: USERS EMBED HOSTNAMES IN FILENAMES) ! 751: \end{nrtc} ! 752: ! 753: \item AMENABILITY: ! 754: \begin{nrtc} ! 755: \item REQUIRES NO END-SYSTEM MODIFICATION ! 756: ! 757: \item MAY INTRODUCE ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS ! 758: \end{nrtc} ! 759: \end{nrtc} ! 760: \end{bwslide} ! 761: ! 762: ! 763: \begin{bwslide} ! 764: \part* {TRANSPORT GATEWAYS}\bf ! 765: ! 766: \begin{nrtc} ! 767: \item IDEA: GATEWAY AT THE TRANSPORT LAYER SO AS TO AVOID NEEDING ! 768: MULTIPLE APPLICATION GATEWAYS ! 769: \begin{quote}\em ! 770: ``We could do it, but it would be wrong.''\\ \raggedleft ! 771: -- Richard Nixon, The Watergate Tapes (1974) ! 772: \end{quote} ! 773: ! 774: \item ALTHOUGH THE OSI (TP4) AND INTERNET (TCP) TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS DIFFER, ! 775: THE SERVICE IS QUITE SIMILAR ! 776: ! 777: \item HENCE, IT IS TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE TO PERFORM THE MAPPINGS ! 778: \begin{nrtc} ! 779: \item (ALTHOUGH IT'S A LOT OF HARD WORK) ! 780: \end{nrtc} ! 781: \end{nrtc} ! 782: \end{bwslide} ! 783: ! 784: ! 785: \begin{bwslide} ! 786: \ctitle {TRANSPORT GATEWAYS (cont.)} ! 787: ! 788: \vskip.5in ! 789: \diagram[p]{figureT-14} ! 790: \end{bwslide} ! 791: ! 792: ! 793: \begin{bwslide} ! 794: \ctitle {THE OBVIOUS QUESTION} ! 795: ! 796: \begin{nrtc} ! 797: \item WHAT APPLICATION DO YOU RUN WHEN USING THIS? ! 798: \begin{nrtc} ! 799: \item CAN'T RUN INTERNET APPLICATIONS IN THE OSI NETWORK, ! 800: SINCE THE TRANSPORT GATEWAY YIELDS OSI TRANSPORT SEMANTICS ! 801: ! 802: \item CAN'T RUN OSI APPLICATIONS IN THE INTERNET NETWORK, ! 803: SINCE THE TRANSPORT GATEWAY YIELDS INTERNET TRANSPORT SEMANTICS ! 804: \end{nrtc} ! 805: ! 806: \item THIS APPROACH FAILS BECAUSE IT PRESENTS DIFFERENT SERVICE SEMANTICS ! 807: IN EACH NETWORK ! 808: \end{nrtc} ! 809: \end{bwslide} ! 810: ! 811: ! 812: \begin{bwslide} ! 813: \part {SERVICE-BASED APPROACHES}\bf ! 814: ! 815: \begin{nrtc} ! 816: \item BY THE TIME OSI-BASED NETWORKS ARE TRULY WIDESPREAD, ! 817: TCP/IP-BASED NETWORKS WILL ALREADY OFFER A MIX OF SERVICES: ! 818: \begin{nrtc} ! 819: \item SUCH AS FTAM AND MHS, IN ADDITION TO FTP AND SMTP ! 820: \end{nrtc} ! 821: ! 822: \item IN OTHER WORDS, PERHAPS THE TRANSITION TO OSI BEGINS WITH NEW ! 823: APPLICATIONS ON HOSTS AND NO CHANGES TO THE NETWORK ! 824: \end{nrtc} ! 825: \end{bwslide} ! 826: ! 827: ! 828: \begin{bwslide} ! 829: \ctitle {WOULD THIS REALLY HAPPEN?} ! 830: ! 831: \begin{nrtc} ! 832: \item RECALL THAT USERS ARE INTERESTED IN \underline{SERVICES} NOT ! 833: \underline{PROTOCOLS} ! 834: ! 835: \item THE OSI APPLICATIONS ARE MUCH RICHER THAN THEIR INTERNET COUNTERPARTS ! 836: ! 837: \item IN CONTRAST, AT THE LOWER-LAYERS THE INTERNET SUITE ``WORKS BETTER'' ! 838: \begin{nrtc} ! 839: \item AS SUCH, IT IS UNLIKELY TO BE REPLACED BY THE OSI LOWER-LAYERS ! 840: FOR QUITE SOME TIME ! 841: \end{nrtc} ! 842: \end{nrtc} ! 843: \end{bwslide} ! 844: ! 845: ! 846: \begin{bwslide} ! 847: \ctitle {OBSERVATION} ! 848: ! 849: \begin{nrtc} ! 850: \item GIVEN THE ABOVE ASSUMPTION, IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT: ! 851: \begin{nrtc} ! 852: \item WE HAVE TWO COMMUNITIES USING THE SAME APPLICATIONS ! 853: (OSI), AND ! 854: ! 855: \item ONLY THE UNDERLYING ``TS-STACK'' WILL DIFFER BETWEEN THE TWO: ! 856: \begin{nrtc} ! 857: \item IN THE OSI COMMUNITY: TP4/CLNP/$\ldots$ ! 858: ! 859: \item IN THE TCP COMMUNITY: RFC1006/TCP/IP/$\ldots$ ! 860: \end{nrtc} ! 861: \end{nrtc} ! 862: ! 863: \item THIS LEADS US TO POSTULATE AN INTERESTING COEXISTENCE ! 864: STRATEGY: ! 865: \begin{nrtc} ! 866: \item LET'S RUN OSI APPLICATIONS, END-TO-END, BETWEEN THE TWO ! 867: \end{nrtc} ! 868: ! 869: \item IN A SENSE, THIS IS A HYBRID OF THE TWO PREVIOUS APPROACHES, ! 870: INTENDED TO MINIMIZE THE DISADVANTAGES OF EACH ! 871: \begin{nrtc} ! 872: \item SAME APPLICATION PROTOCOL,\\ ! 873: BUT DIFFERENT UNDERYLING LAYERS ! 874: \end{nrtc} ! 875: \end{nrtc} ! 876: \end{bwslide} ! 877: ! 878: ! 879: \begin{bwslide} ! 880: \part* {TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES}\bf ! 881: ! 882: \begin{nrtc} ! 883: \item INTRODUCE A TRANSPORT ENTITY CALLED THE ``TS-BRIDGE'' ! 884: \begin{quote}\em ! 885: ``Users are interested in services, not protocols.''\\ \raggedleft ! 886: -- Marshall Rose, NYSERNet, Inc. ! 887: \end{quote} ! 888: ! 889: \item THE TS-BRIDGE ``COPIES'' SERVICE PRIMITIVES FROM ONE TS-STACK TO THE ! 890: OTHER, e.g.: ! 891: \begin{nrtc} ! 892: \item UPON RECEIVING A T-CONNECT.INDICATION PRIMITIVE FROM ONE ! 893: TS-STACK, ! 894: ! 895: \item IT ISSUES A T-CONNECT.REQUEST PRIMITIVE TO THE OTHER TS-STACK ! 896: \end{nrtc} ! 897: ! 898: \item AS DISCUSSED EARLIER, THIS TECHNOLOGY IS USED FOR CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN ! 899: DIFFERENT OSI COMMUNITIES ! 900: \end{nrtc} ! 901: \end{bwslide} ! 902: ! 903: ! 904: \begin{bwslide} ! 905: \ctitle {TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES (cont.)} ! 906: ! 907: \vskip.5in ! 908: \diagram[p]{figureT-9} ! 909: \end{bwslide} ! 910: ! 911: ! 912: \begin{bwslide} ! 913: \ctitle {CONS vs. CLNS CONNECTIVITY} ! 914: ! 915: \vskip.5in ! 916: \diagram[p]{figureT-19} ! 917: \end{bwslide} ! 918: ! 919: ! 920: \begin{bwslide} ! 921: \ctitle {THE TS-BRIDGE AND THE OSI MODEL\\ (REVIEW)} ! 922: ! 923: \begin{nrtc} ! 924: \item THE TS-BRIDGE IS A LEVEL-FOUR ROUTER ! 925: ! 926: \item POTENTIAL PROBLEMS: ! 927: \begin{nrtc} ! 928: \item THE TS-BRIDGE MAINTAINS STATE AS TO THE EXISTING CONNECTIONS ! 929: ! 930: \item TWO CHECKSUMS, AND NEITHER REALLY END-TO-END ! 931: ! 932: \item \underline{MAY} THWART SOPHISTICATED BACK-PRESSURE TECHNIQUES ! 933: \end{nrtc} ! 934: \end{nrtc} ! 935: \end{bwslide} ! 936: ! 937: ! 938: \begin{bwslide} ! 939: \ctitle {AN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TS-BRIDGE} ! 940: ! 941: \begin{nrtc} ! 942: \item FIRST DEMONSTRATION IN FEBRUARY, 1988 ! 943: \begin{nrtc} ! 944: \item TP4/CLNP to RFC1006/TCP ! 945: \end{nrtc} ! 946: ! 947: \item ANOTHER IMPLEMENTATION IN EUROPE IS HANDLING ! 948: \begin{nrtc} ! 949: \item TP0/X.25 to RFC1006/TCP ! 950: \end{nrtc} ! 951: \end{nrtc} ! 952: \end{bwslide} ! 953: ! 954: ! 955: \begin{bwslide} ! 956: \ctitle {SCORECARD} ! 957: ! 958: \begin{nrtc} ! 959: \item PERFORMANCE: FAIR; WHEN TS-BRIDGE IS MADE INTO A KERNEL-RESIDENT ! 960: STREAMS MODULE IT SHOULD IMPROVE DRAMATICALLY ! 961: ! 962: \item FLEXIBILITY: HIGH; INDEPENDENT OF ANY APPLICATION ! 963: ! 964: \item TRANSPARENCY: TOTAL ! 965: ! 966: \item AMENABILITY: ! 967: \begin{nrtc} ! 968: \item TCP END-SYSTEMS MUST RUN ``NEW'' PROTOCOLS ! 969: \begin{nrtc} ! 970: \item BUT, NO MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED TO END-SYSTEM KERNELS ! 971: \end{nrtc} ! 972: ! 973: \item MAY INTRODUCE ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS ! 974: \end{nrtc} ! 975: \end{nrtc} ! 976: \end{bwslide} ! 977: ! 978: ! 979: \begin{bwslide} ! 980: \part* {NETWORK TUNNELS}\bf ! 981: ! 982: \begin{nrtc} ! 983: \item IDEA: ENCAPSULATE CLNP INSIDE OF IP, TREATING IP AS SIMPLY A DATA LINK ! 984: PROTOCOL ! 985: \begin{quote}\em ! 986: ``Encapsulation complies with the layering concept, but violates the notion ! 987: of absolute levels.''\\ \raggedleft ! 988: -- Danny Cohen and Jon Postel, ``The ISO Reference Model and Other Protocol ! 989: Architectures'' (1983) ! 990: \end{quote} ! 991: ! 992: \item NS-TUNNEL PERFORMS AS A ROUTER, REMOVING ONE DATA LINK HEADER AND ! 993: ADDING ANOTHER ! 994: ! 995: \item METHOD SPECIFIED IN [RFC1070] ! 996: ! 997: \item ADDRESS MAPPINGS SPECIFIED IN [RFC1069] ! 998: \end{nrtc} ! 999: \end{bwslide} ! 1000: ! 1001: ! 1002: \begin{bwslide} ! 1003: \ctitle {TUNNELING} ! 1004: ! 1005: \vskip.5in ! 1006: \diagram[p]{figureT-18} ! 1007: \end{bwslide} ! 1008: ! 1009: ! 1010: \begin{bwslide} ! 1011: \ctitle {NETWORK TUNNELS} ! 1012: ! 1013: \vskip.5in ! 1014: \diagram[p]{figureT-10} ! 1015: \end{bwslide} ! 1016: ! 1017: ! 1018: \begin{bwslide} ! 1019: \ctitle {INTERESTING FEATURES} ! 1020: ! 1021: \begin{nrtc} ! 1022: \item NO STATE MAINTAINED BY NS-TUNNEL ! 1023: ! 1024: \item A TRUE END-TO-END CHECKSUM ! 1025: \end{nrtc} ! 1026: \end{bwslide} ! 1027: ! 1028: ! 1029: \begin{bwslide} ! 1030: \ctitle {POTENTIAL PROBLEMS} ! 1031: ! 1032: \begin{nrtc} ! 1033: \item REQUIRES COMMON HIGHER-LEVEL PROTOCOLS (TRANSPORT AND ABOVE) ON BOTH ! 1034: END-SYSTEMS, BUT DOES NOT REQUIRE ALL INTERVENING ROUTERS TO USE THE ! 1035: SAME NETWORK PROTOCOL ! 1036: ! 1037: \item THE TCP END-SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION CHOICES ARE SIMILAR TO NETBIOS OVER ! 1038: TCP [RFC1001/1002] ! 1039: \end{nrtc} ! 1040: \end{bwslide} ! 1041: ! 1042: ! 1043: \begin{bwslide} ! 1044: \ctitle {AN IMPLEMENATION OF AN NS-TUNNEL} ! 1045: ! 1046: \begin{nrtc} ! 1047: \item HAVEN'T SEE ANY YET ! 1048: \begin{nrtc} ! 1049: \item BUT WILL BE IN 4.4BSD UNIX ! 1050: \end{nrtc} ! 1051: ! 1052: \item NEED A LOT OF CLNP-BASED NETWORKS BEFORE THIS IS OF USE ! 1053: ! 1054: \item SO THIS WILL HAPPEN AT THE END OF THE TRANSITION PERIOD ! 1055: \end{nrtc} ! 1056: \end{bwslide} ! 1057: ! 1058: ! 1059: \begin{bwslide} ! 1060: \ctitle {SCORECARD} ! 1061: ! 1062: \begin{nrtc} ! 1063: \item PERFORMANCE: NO WORSE THAN TYPICAL CLNP-ROUTER (AND PROBABLY A LOT ! 1064: BETTER TOO!) ! 1065: ! 1066: \item FLEXIBILITY: HIGH (INDEPENDENT OF ANY APPLICATION) ! 1067: ! 1068: \item TRANSPARENCY: TOTAL ! 1069: ! 1070: \item AMENABILITY: TCP END-SYSTEMS MUST RUN BOTH TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS ! 1071: \end{nrtc} ! 1072: \end{bwslide} ! 1073: ! 1074: ! 1075: \begin{bwslide} ! 1076: \part {EXAMPLES}\bf ! 1077: ! 1078: \begin{nrtc} ! 1079: \item DoD OSI IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ! 1080: ! 1081: \item GENERIC EXAMPLE ! 1082: ! 1083: \item CONCLUSIONS ! 1084: \end{nrtc} ! 1085: \end{bwslide} ! 1086: ! 1087: ! 1088: \begin{bwslide} ! 1089: \part* {DoD OSI\\ IMPLEMENTATION PLAN}\bf ! 1090: ! 1091: \begin{nrtc} ! 1092: \item IMPLEMENT CAPABILITY TO USE OSI IN DoD INTERNETWORK ENVIRONMENT ! 1093: \begin{nrtc} ! 1094: \item OSI-POSIX PROJECT ! 1095: \end{nrtc} ! 1096: ! 1097: \item PROVIDE THE CAPABILITY FOR DoD AND OSI PROTOCOLS TO INTEROPERATE ! 1098: \begin{nrtc} ! 1099: \item FTAM-FTP GATEWAY ! 1100: ! 1101: \item MHS-SMTP GATEWAY ! 1102: \end{nrtc} ! 1103: \end{nrtc} ! 1104: \end{bwslide} ! 1105: ! 1106: ! 1107: \begin{bwslide} ! 1108: \ctitle {OSI-POSIX PROJECT} ! 1109: ! 1110: \begin{nrtc} ! 1111: \item GOAL: ACCELLERATE THE UBIQUITY OF OSI ! 1112: ! 1113: \item APPROACH: OPENLY AVAILABLE, COMPLETE OSI IMPLEMENTATION FOR NEXT MAJOR ! 1114: RELEASE OF BERKELEY \unix/ ! 1115: ! 1116: \item FOR MORE DETAILS: ! 1117: \begin{quote} ! 1118: OSI PROTOCOLS WITHIN AN OPENLY AVAILABLE, POSIX-CONFORMANT, BERKELEY UNIX ! 1119: ENVIRONMENT ! 1120: \end{quote} ! 1121: APPEARING IN ConneXions, OCTOBER, 1988 ! 1122: \end{nrtc} ! 1123: \end{bwslide} ! 1124: ! 1125: ! 1126: \begin{bwslide} ! 1127: \diagram[p]{figureT-15} ! 1128: \end{bwslide} ! 1129: ! 1130: ! 1131: \begin{bwslide} ! 1132: \diagram[p]{figureT-16} ! 1133: \end{bwslide} ! 1134: ! 1135: ! 1136: \begin{bwslide} ! 1137: \part* {GENERIC EXAMPLE}\bf ! 1138: ! 1139: \begin{nrtc} ! 1140: \item TWO PRONGS: ! 1141: \begin{nrtc} ! 1142: \item FAVOR USE OF OSI APPLICATIONS OVER TCP ON LAN MESH ! 1143: ! 1144: \item LOCATE APPLICATION GATEWAYS AND A TS-BRIDGE ON ALL NODES ! 1145: WITH WAN ATTACHMENETS ! 1146: \end{nrtc} ! 1147: ! 1148: \item AWAIT OSI LOWER-LAYERS TO BECOME COMPETITIVE ! 1149: \end{nrtc} ! 1150: \end{bwslide} ! 1151: ! 1152: ! 1153: \begin{bwslide} ! 1154: \ctitle {GENERIC EXAMPLE (cont.)} ! 1155: ! 1156: \begin{nrtc} ! 1157: \item EACH ATTACHMENT LOCUS SHOULD SUPPORT COEXISTENCE SERVICES ! 1158: ! 1159: \item IF RESOURCES PERMIT, SELECT ONE OTHER SYSTEM TO SUPPORT THESE ! 1160: SERVICES FOR USE BY LOCAL UNI-STACK HOSTS ! 1161: ! 1162: \item THIS ``COVERS ALL BASES'' BY HANDLING ALL POSSIBLE OSI COMBINATIONS ! 1163: WITH A BIT OF EXTRA REDUNDANCY ! 1164: ! 1165: \item MIGHT REQUIRE A BIT OF SOPHISTICATED USE FROM THE DIRECTORY ! 1166: \end{nrtc} ! 1167: \end{bwslide} ! 1168: ! 1169: ! 1170: \begin{bwslide} ! 1171: \ctitle {A LAN OF MANY COLORS} ! 1172: ! 1173: \vskip.5in ! 1174: \diagram[p]{figureT-17} ! 1175: \end{bwslide} ! 1176: ! 1177: ! 1178: \begin{bwslide} ! 1179: \part* {CONCLUSIONS}\bf ! 1180: ! 1181: \begin{quote}\em ! 1182: ``Optimality differs according to context.''\\ \raggedleft ! 1183: -- Michael Padlipsky, The Elements of Networking Style (1985) ! 1184: \end{quote} ! 1185: \end{bwslide} ! 1186: ! 1187: ! 1188: \begin{bwslide} ! 1189: \ctitle {CONCLUSIONS (cont.)} ! 1190: ! 1191: \begin{nrtc} ! 1192: \item TCP/IP-BASED NETWORKS WILL OFFER OSI APPLICATIONS ! 1193: ! 1194: \item COEXISTENCE IN THE SHORT TERM: ! 1195: \begin{nrtc} ! 1196: \item TS-BRIDGE MINIMIZES SOFTWARE INVESTMENT ! 1197: \end{nrtc} ! 1198: ! 1199: \item COEXISTENCE IN THE LONG TERM: ! 1200: \begin{nrtc} ! 1201: \item NS-TUNNEL MAXIMIZES PERFORMANCE AND ROBUSTNESS ! 1202: \end{nrtc} ! 1203: ! 1204: \item IF/WHEN THERE ARE NO MORE TCP/IP-BASED NETWORKS, THEN THE ! 1205: COEXISTENCE PERIOD IS OVER, AND TRANSITION IS A NON-ISSUE! ! 1206: \end{nrtc} ! 1207: \end{bwslide}
This archive runs on limited infrastructure. Preserving old code on modern bandwidth. Automated agents are requested to crawl responsibly.