|
|
1.1 ! root 1: % run this through LaTeX with the appropriate wrapper ! 2: ! 3: \dotopic{END-TO-END SERVICES} ! 4: ! 5: ! 6: \begin{bwslide} ! 7: \part* {OUTLINE}\bf ! 8: ! 9: \begin{description} ! 10: \item[PART I:] CONCEPTS ! 11: ! 12: \item[PART II:] BUILDING BLOCKS ! 13: ! 14: \item[PART III:] ACHIEVING CONNECTIVITY ! 15: ! 16: \item[PART IV:] COMPARISON TO TCP/IP ! 17: \end{description} ! 18: \end{bwslide} ! 19: ! 20: ! 21: \begin{bwslide} ! 22: \ctitle {A BIG ACKNOWLEDGEMENT} ! 23: ! 24: \begin{nrtc} ! 25: \item MY INTEREST IN END-TO-END SERVICES IS ONLY AS A USER, ! 26: NOT A PROVIDER ! 27: ! 28: \item AS SUCH, I'D PREFER TO USE THEM AS A BLACK BOX ! 29: ! 30: \item UNFORTUNATELY, THIS APPROACH DOESN'T WORK IN PRACTICE ! 31: \begin{nrtc} ! 32: \item THE LOWER-LAYERS AREN'T HOMOGENEOUS ! 33: \end{nrtc} ! 34: ! 35: \item THE PRACTICAL PERSPECTIVE PRESENTED HERE IS HEAVILY INFLUENCED BY ! 36: \begin{nrtc} ! 37: \item STEPHEN E.~KILLE OF UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON ! 38: \end{nrtc} ! 39: ! 40: \item AND HIS PAPER ! 41: \begin{nrtc} ! 42: \item ``AN INTERIM APPROACH TO USE OF NETWORK ADDRESSES'' ! 43: \end{nrtc} ! 44: \end{nrtc} ! 45: \end{bwslide} ! 46: ! 47: ! 48: \begin{bwslide} ! 49: \part {CONCEPTS}\bf ! 50: ! 51: \begin{nrtc} ! 52: \item BASIC TERMINOLOGY ! 53: ! 54: \item NETWORK SERVICE ! 55: ! 56: \item TRANSPORT SERVICE ! 57: \end{nrtc} ! 58: \end{bwslide} ! 59: ! 60: ! 61: \begin{bwslide} ! 62: \part* {BASIC TERMINOLOGY}\bf ! 63: ! 64: \begin{nrtc} ! 65: \item END-TO-END SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR ! 66: \begin{nrtc} ! 67: \item DATA TRANSFER ! 68: \end{nrtc} ! 69: ! 70: \item APPLICATION SERVICES RESPONSIBLE FOR ! 71: \begin{nrtc} ! 72: \item INFORMATION TRANSFER ! 73: \end{nrtc} ! 74: \end{nrtc} ! 75: \end{bwslide} ! 76: ! 77: ! 78: \begin{bwslide} ! 79: \ctitle {BASIC TERMINOLOGY (cont.)} ! 80: ! 81: \begin{nrtc} ! 82: \item TERMINOLOGY DIFFERS BETWEEN NETWORKING COMMUNITIES ! 83: \begin{nrtc} ! 84: \item WE'LL USE ``OSIFIED'' TERMINOLOGY ! 85: \end{nrtc} ! 86: ! 87: \item A NETWORK CONSISTS OF A COLLECTION OF SUBNETWORKS CONNECTED ! 88: BY INTERMEDIATE SYSTEMS AND POPULATED BY END-SYSTEMS ! 89: ! 90: \item DATA TRANSFER OCCURS BETWEEN TWO END-SYSTEMS, ! 91: POTENTIALLY GOING THROUGH ONE OR MORE INTERMEDIATE-SYSTEMS ! 92: IF THE END-SYSTEMS RESIDE ON DIFFERENT SUBNETWORKS ! 93: \end{nrtc} ! 94: \end{bwslide} ! 95: ! 96: ! 97: \begin{bwslide} ! 98: \ctitle {THE NETWORK} ! 99: ! 100: \vskip.5in ! 101: \diagram[p]{figureE-2} ! 102: \end{bwslide} ! 103: ! 104: ! 105: \begin{bwslide} ! 106: \ctitle {END-SYSTEMs (ES)} ! 107: ! 108: \begin{nrtc} ! 109: \item CONTAIN BOTH: ! 110: \begin{nrtc} ! 111: \item THE LOWER-LAYER PROTOCOLS NECESSARY FOR DATA TRANSFER, AND ! 112: ! 113: \item THE UPPER-LAYER PROTOCOLS NECESSARY FOR INFORMATION TRANSFER ! 114: \end{nrtc} ! 115: ! 116: \item WHERE THE APPLICATIONS LIVE ! 117: ! 118: \item WHAT THE USERS ARE INTERESTED IN ! 119: \end{nrtc} ! 120: \end{bwslide} ! 121: ! 122: ! 123: \begin{bwslide} ! 124: \ctitle {INTERMEDIATE-SYSTEMs (IS)} ! 125: ! 126: \begin{nrtc} ! 127: \item CONTAIN ONLY: ! 128: \begin{nrtc} ! 129: \item THE LOWER-LAYER PROTOCOLS NECESSARY FOR DATA TRANSFER ! 130: \end{nrtc} ! 131: ! 132: \item ULTIMATELY CONTAIN HIGHER-LAYER PROTOCOLS TO SUPPORT MANAGEMENT ! 133: ! 134: \item IN ADDITION TO PASSING ALONG APPLICATION DATA, ! 135: INTERMEDIATE-SYSTEMS COOPERATE AMONGST THEMSELVES ! 136: \begin{nrtc} ! 137: \item e.g., EXCHANGE ROUTING DATA ! 138: \end{nrtc} ! 139: \end{nrtc} ! 140: \end{bwslide} ! 141: ! 142: ! 143: \begin{bwslide} ! 144: \part* {NETWORK SERVICE}\bf ! 145: ! 146: \begin{nrtc} ! 147: \item NETWORK SERVICE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MOVING DATA FROM ONE END-SYSTEM ! 148: TO ANOTHER ! 149: ! 150: \item UNFORTUNATELY, THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT VIEWS AS TO WHAT THIS MEANS: ! 151: \begin{nrtc} ! 152: \item CONNECTION-ORIENTED ! 153: ! 154: \item CONNECTIONLESS-MODE ! 155: \end{nrtc} ! 156: ! 157: \item PERHAPS THE GREATEST ``RELIGIOUS'' ISSUE OF THE LAST DECADE ! 158: \end{nrtc} ! 159: \end{bwslide} ! 160: ! 161: ! 162: \begin{bwslide} ! 163: \ctitle {CONNECTION-ORIENTED NETWORK SERVICE\\ (CONS)} ! 164: ! 165: \begin{nrtc} ! 166: \item BASED ON THE NOTION OF ``RESERVATIONS'': ! 167: \begin{nrtc} ! 168: \item ON CONNECTION REQUEST, MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS ARE STATED ! 169: \begin{nrtc} ! 170: \item (e.g., THROUGHPUT) ! 171: \end{nrtc} ! 172: ! 173: \item IF REQUEST IS GRANTED, THESE RESOURCES ARE RESERVED FOR THE ! 174: CONNECTION'S DURATION ! 175: \end{nrtc} ! 176: ! 177: \item CO-MODE SERVICE PRIMITIVES ! 178: \begin{nrtc} ! 179: \item N-CONNECT: CONNECTION ESTABLISHMENT ! 180: ! 181: \item N-DATA (N-DATA-ACKNOWLEDGE): DATA TRANSFER ! 182: ! 183: \item N-EXPEDITED-DATA: EXPEDITED DATA TRANSFER ! 184: ! 185: \item N-DISCONNECT: CONNECTION RELEASE ! 186: ! 187: \item N-RESET: CONNECTION RESYNCHRONIZATION ! 188: \end{nrtc} ! 189: \end{nrtc} ! 190: \end{bwslide} ! 191: ! 192: ! 193: \begin{bwslide} ! 194: \ctitle {CONS (cont.)} ! 195: ! 196: \begin{nrtc} ! 197: \item GOOD POINTS: ! 198: \begin{nrtc} ! 199: \item LOW OVERHEAD FOR DATA TRANSIT ! 200: ! 201: \item IMMUNITY FROM OTHER NETWORK TRAFFIC ! 202: ! 203: \item ACCOUNTABILITY ! 204: \end{nrtc} ! 205: ! 206: \item BAD POINTS: ! 207: \begin{nrtc} ! 208: \item HIGH OVERHEAD FOR CONNECTION ESTABLISHMENT ! 209: ! 210: \item QUESTIONABLE RECOVERY CHARACTERISTICS ! 211: ! 212: \item IF RESOURCES ARE RESERVED, BUT NOT IN USE, ! 213: NEW CONNECTION REQUESTS ARE DENIED ! 214: \end{nrtc} ! 215: \end{nrtc} ! 216: \end{bwslide} ! 217: ! 218: ! 219: \begin{bwslide} ! 220: \ctitle {CONNECTIONLESS-MODE NETWORK SERVICE\\ (CLNS)} ! 221: ! 222: \begin{nrtc} ! 223: \item BASED ON THE NOTION OF ``COME AS YOU ARE'': ! 224: \begin{nrtc} ! 225: \item NO CONNECTION REQUEST, JUST SEND DATA ! 226: ! 227: \item TRANSPORT MUST DYNAMICALLY DETERMINE IF REQUIREMENTS ARE ! 228: BEING MET ! 229: \end{nrtc} ! 230: ! 231: \item CL-MODE SERVICE PRIMITIVES ! 232: \begin{nrtc} ! 233: \item N-UNITDATA: DATA TRANSFER ! 234: \end{nrtc} ! 235: \end{nrtc} ! 236: \end{bwslide} ! 237: ! 238: ! 239: \begin{bwslide} ! 240: \ctitle {CLNS (cont.)} ! 241: ! 242: \begin{nrtc} ! 243: \item GOOD POINTS: ! 244: \begin{nrtc} ! 245: \item LESS DELAY FOR INITIAL DATA TRANSIT ! 246: ! 247: \item POTENTIALLY MORE ROBUST WITH CHANGES IN THE NETWORK ! 248: ! 249: \item SQUEEZES ``LAST DROP'' FROM AVAILABLE RESOURCES ! 250: \end{nrtc} ! 251: ! 252: \item BAD POINTS: ! 253: \begin{nrtc} ! 254: \item HIGHER OVERHEAD FOR DATA TRANSIT IF MULTIPLE SUBNETWORKS ! 255: ARE INVOLVED ! 256: ! 257: \item REQUIRES WELL-BEHAVED USERS TO PREVENT OVER-SUBSCRIPTION ! 258: \end{nrtc} ! 259: \end{nrtc} ! 260: \end{bwslide} ! 261: ! 262: ! 263: \begin{bwslide} ! 264: \part* {TRANSPORT SERVICE} ! 265: ! 266: \begin{nrtc} ! 267: \item TRANSPORT SERVICE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MOVING DATA FROM ONE END-SYSTEM ! 268: TO ANOTHER~---~RELIABLY ! 269: \begin{nrtc} ! 270: \item (WE'RE CONSIDERING ONLY CO-MODE TRANSPORT SERVICE) ! 271: \end{nrtc} ! 272: ! 273: \item IF CO-MODE NETWORK SERVICE IS USED, THIS IS TRIVIAL ! 274: ! 275: \item OTHERWISE, SOPHISTICATED ALGORITHMS ARE REQUIRED IN PROTOCOLS ! 276: WHICH IMPLEMENT TRANSPORT SERVICE ! 277: \end{nrtc} ! 278: \end{bwslide} ! 279: ! 280: ! 281: \begin{bwslide} ! 282: \ctitle {TRANSPORT SERVICE (cont.)} ! 283: ! 284: \begin{nrtc} ! 285: \item IMPORTANT IMPLICATION:\\ ! 286: \begin{nrtc} ! 287: \item AVAILABLE NETWORK SERVICE DETERMINES WHICH ! 288: TRANSPORT PROTOCOL CAN BE USED ! 289: ! 290: \item HOWEVER, WHEN INITIATING A CONNECTION, ! 291: TRANSPORT SERVICE IS ACTIVE PRIOR TO NETWORK SERVICE! ! 292: \end{nrtc} ! 293: \end{nrtc} ! 294: \end{bwslide} ! 295: ! 296: ! 297: \begin{bwslide} ! 298: \ctitle {CHOICE OF NETWORK SERVICE} ! 299: ! 300: \begin{nrtc} ! 301: \item CHOICE OF NETWORK SERVICE IS ECO-POLITICAL NOT TECHNICAL ! 302: \begin{nrtc} ! 303: \item EITHER APPROACH CAN BE MADE TO WORK WELL ! 304: \end{nrtc} ! 305: ! 306: \item CO-MODE NETWORK SERVICE IS MORE SUITED TOWARDS A COMMON-CARRIER MODEL ! 307: \begin{nrtc} ! 308: \item ACCOUNTABILITY AND ISOLATION ! 309: \end{nrtc} ! 310: THIS IS TYPIFIED BY PUBLIC DATA NETWORKS ! 311: ! 312: \item CL-MODE NETWORK SERVICE IS MORE GENERAL ! 313: \begin{nrtc} ! 314: \item ADAPTABILITY AND COOPERATION ! 315: \end{nrtc} ! 316: THIS IS TYPIFIED BY CLOSED COMMUNITY NETWORKS ! 317: ! 318: \item HOWEVER, THE TWO APPROACHES DON'T MIX WELL ! 319: \end{nrtc} ! 320: \end{bwslide} ! 321: ! 322: ! 323: \begin{bwslide} ! 324: \part {BUILDING BLOCKS}\bf ! 325: ! 326: \begin{nrtc} ! 327: \item ADDRESS FORMATS ! 328: ! 329: \item NETWORK BINDING ! 330: ! 331: \item TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS ! 332: ! 333: \item APPLICATION USE OF END-TO-END SERVICES ! 334: ! 335: \item EMULATION OF OSI END-TO-END SERVICES ! 336: \end{nrtc} ! 337: \end{bwslide} ! 338: ! 339: ! 340: \begin{bwslide} ! 341: \part* {ADDRESS FORMATS}\bf ! 342: ! 343: \begin{nrtc} ! 344: \item HIERARHICALLY STRUCTURED ! 345: \begin{nrtc} ! 346: \item ADDRESSING DOMAINS, SUB-DOMAINS ! 347: ! 348: \item UNAMBIGUOUS PREFIXES ! 349: \end{nrtc} ! 350: ! 351: \item MAIN GOAL: FACILITATE ALLOCATION ! 352: ! 353: \item NO IMPLICATIONS ON ``HOW TO GET THERE'' ! 354: \begin{nrtc} ! 355: \item BUT STRUCTURE MAY FACILITATE ROUTING DECISIONS ! 356: \end{nrtc} ! 357: \end{nrtc} ! 358: \end{bwslide} ! 359: ! 360: ! 361: \begin{bwslide} ! 362: \ctitle {ADDRESS FORMATS (cont.)} ! 363: ! 364: \begin{nrtc} ! 365: \item AN ADDRESSING AUTHORITY DEFINES STRUCTURE OF DOMAIN ! 366: \begin{nrtc} ! 367: \item TERMED AN ABSTRACT SYNTAX ! 368: \end{nrtc} ! 369: AND ALSO ALLOCATES VALUES ! 370: ! 371: \item A TRANSFER SYNTAX DEFINES HOW ADDRESSES ARE ENCODED ! 372: \end{nrtc} ! 373: \end{bwslide} ! 374: ! 375: ! 376: \begin{bwslide} ! 377: \ctitle {TOP-LEVEL} ! 378: ! 379: \begin{nrtc} ! 380: \item ADDRESS IS DIVIDED INTO TWO PARTS: ! 381: \begin{nrtc} ! 382: \item INITIAL DOMAIN PART (IDP), AND ! 383: ! 384: \item DOMAIN SPECIFIC PART (DSP) ! 385: \end{nrtc} ! 386: \end{nrtc} ! 387: ! 388: \diagram[p]{figureE-3} ! 389: \end{bwslide} ! 390: ! 391: ! 392: \begin{bwslide} ! 393: \ctitle {TOP-LEVEL (cont.)} ! 394: ! 395: \begin{nrtc} ! 396: \item AUTHORITY AND FORMAT IDENTIFIER (AFI) DEFINES HOW ! 397: \begin{nrtc} ! 398: \item IDI IS INTERPRETED, AND ! 399: ! 400: \item HOW DSP IS FORMATTED ! 401: \begin{nrtc} ! 402: \item (DECIMAL/BINARY ABSTRACT SYNTAX) ! 403: \end{nrtc} ! 404: \end{nrtc} ! 405: ! 406: \item INITIAL DOMAIN IDENTIFIER (IDI) SAYS WHO OWNS THE DSP ! 407: \begin{nrtc} ! 408: \item MIGHT BE VARIABLE LENGTH ! 409: ! 410: \item MIGHT HAVE (SIGNIFICANT) LEADING ZEROS ! 411: \end{nrtc} ! 412: ! 413: \item DOMAIN SPECIFIC PART (DSP) IS JUST THAT ! 414: \end{nrtc} ! 415: \end{bwslide} ! 416: ! 417: ! 418: \begin{bwslide} ! 419: \ctitle {EXAMPLE 1:\\ X.121 ADDRESS} ! 420: ! 421: \begin{nrtc} ! 422: \item AN X.121 ADDRESS MAY BE ENCODED USING ! 423: \begin{nrtc} ! 424: \item AFI = 36 ! 425: ! 426: \item IDI = X.121 ADDRESS (UP TO 14~DIGITS) ! 427: \end{nrtc} ! 428: \end{nrtc} ! 429: ! 430: \diagram[p]{figureE-4} ! 431: \end{bwslide} ! 432: ! 433: ! 434: \begin{bwslide} ! 435: \ctitle {EXAMPLE 2:\\ ICD ADDRESS} ! 436: ! 437: \begin{nrtc} ! 438: \item AN INTERNATIONALLY RECOGNIZED ENTITY MAY ALLOCATE ADDRESSES USING ! 439: \begin{nrtc} ! 440: \item AFI = 47 ! 441: ! 442: \item IDI = INTERNATIONAL CODE DESIGNATOR (4~DIGITS) ! 443: \end{nrtc} ! 444: \end{nrtc} ! 445: ! 446: \diagram[p]{figureE-5} ! 447: \end{bwslide} ! 448: ! 449: ! 450: \begin{bwslide} ! 451: \ctitle {EXAMPLE 3:\\ LOCAL ADDRESS} ! 452: ! 453: \begin{nrtc} ! 454: \item ANYONE MIGHT USE A ``LOCAL'' ADDRESSING FORMAT ! 455: \begin{nrtc} ! 456: \item AFI = 49 ! 457: ! 458: \item IDI = NULL (0~DIGITS) ! 459: \end{nrtc} ! 460: \end{nrtc} ! 461: ! 462: \diagram[p]{figureE-6} ! 463: \end{bwslide} ! 464: ! 465: ! 466: \begin{bwslide} ! 467: \part* {NETWORK BINDING}\bf ! 468: ! 469: \begin{nrtc} ! 470: \item HOW DOES DATA GO FROM ORIGINATING TO DESTINATION END-SYSTEM? ! 471: \begin{nrtc} ! 472: \item i.e., HOW IS ROUTING ACCOMPLISHED? ! 473: \end{nrtc} ! 474: ! 475: \item NETWORK SERVICE AT ORIGINATING END-SYSTEM DECIDES ``NEXT HOP'' ! 476: ! 477: \item IF DESTINATION END-SYSTEM IS ON SAME SUBNETWORK, ! 478: THEN NEXT HOP IS DESTINATION END-SYSTEM ! 479: ! 480: \item OTHERWISE, NEXT HOP IS AN INTERMEDIATE SYSTEM (ON THE SAME SUBNETWORK) ! 481: WHICH IS ``CLOSER'' TO THE DESTINATION END-SYSTEM ! 482: \end{nrtc} ! 483: \end{bwslide} ! 484: ! 485: ! 486: \begin{bwslide} ! 487: \ctitle {DETERMINING THE NEXT HOP} ! 488: ! 489: \begin{nrtc} ! 490: \item NETWORK ADDRESSES DO NOT CONTAIN ROUTING INFORMATION ! 491: \begin{nrtc} ! 492: \item IN THEORY, AT LEAST ! 493: \end{nrtc} ! 494: ! 495: \item INTERMEDIATE-SYSTEMS MAINTAIN ROUTING TABLES WHICH TELL ! 496: ``HOW TO GET THERE'' ! 497: ! 498: \item SO, ONCE THE DESTINATION END-SYSTEM'S SUBNETWORK HAS BEEN REACHED, ! 499: NEED A WAY OF DETERMINING ``WHERE IT IS'' ON A PARTICULAR ! 500: SUBNETWORK ! 501: \end{nrtc} ! 502: \end{bwslide} ! 503: ! 504: ! 505: \begin{bwslide} ! 506: \ctitle {SUBNETWORK POINT OF ATTACHMENT (SNPA)} ! 507: ! 508: \begin{nrtc} ! 509: \item A NODE (ES or IS) IS ATTACHED TO A SUBNETWORK AT A ! 510: \begin{nrtc} ! 511: \item SUBNETWORK POINT OF ATTACHMENT (SNPA) ! 512: \end{nrtc} ! 513: ! 514: \item NEED A WAY TO MAP BETWEEN A NETWORK ADDRESS ! 515: AND ITS CORRESPONDING SNPA ! 516: ! 517: \item THE PROBLEM: ! 518: \begin{nrtc} ! 519: \item ROUTING IS A NETWORK-WIDE FUNCTION, ! 520: ! 521: \item SO INFORMATION MUST BE COHERENT NETWORK-WIDE ! 522: \end{nrtc} ! 523: \end{nrtc} ! 524: \end{bwslide} ! 525: ! 526: ! 527: \begin{bwslide} ! 528: \ctitle {MAPPING TO SNPA} ! 529: ! 530: \begin{nrtc} ! 531: \item TWO WAYS TO ACHIEVE DYNAMIC MAPPINGS ! 532: ! 533: \item RUN A PROTOCOL (ES-IS) ON THE SUBNETWORK ! 534: ! 535: \item USE A LOCAL TABLE ! 536: ! 537: \item OTHERWISE MUST EMBED THE SNPA IN THE NETWORK ADDRESS ! 538: \begin{nrtc} ! 539: \item LOSES A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY ! 540: \end{nrtc} ! 541: (AND PRONE TO CONFIGURATION ERRORS) ! 542: \end{nrtc} ! 543: \end{bwslide} ! 544: ! 545: ! 546: \begin{bwslide} ! 547: \part* {TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS}\bf ! 548: ! 549: \begin{nrtc} ! 550: \item AVAILABLE NETWORK SERVICE DETERMINES CHOICE OF TRANSPORT PROTOCOL ! 551: ! 552: \item OSI PROVIDES 5 TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS, TP0--TP4 ! 553: \begin{nrtc} ! 554: \item CLASSES 0--3 WORKS WITH A CO-MODE NETWORK SERVICE ! 555: ! 556: \item CLASS 4 WORKS WITH BOTH CO/CL-MODE NETWORK SERVICES ! 557: \end{nrtc} ! 558: \end{nrtc} ! 559: \end{bwslide} ! 560: ! 561: ! 562: \begin{bwslide} ! 563: \ctitle {NETWORK CLASSES} ! 564: ! 565: \begin{nrtc} ! 566: \item ``A'' --- LOW LOSS, ERRORS SIGNALLED ! 567: ! 568: \item ``B'' --- ERRORS SIGNALLED ! 569: ! 570: \item ``C'' --- ERRORS NOT SIGNALLED ! 571: \begin{nrtc} ! 572: \item LOSS ! 573: ! 574: \item DUPLICATION ! 575: ! 576: \item RE-ORDERING ! 577: ! 578: \item CORRUPTION ! 579: \end{nrtc} ! 580: OF DATA ! 581: \end{nrtc} ! 582: \end{bwslide} ! 583: ! 584: ! 585: \begin{bwslide} ! 586: \ctitle {PROTOCOLS USING\\ CO-MODE NETWORK SERVICE} ! 587: ! 588: \begin{nrtc} ! 589: \item TP0: SIMPLE CLASS ! 590: \begin{nrtc} ! 591: \item NOTHING MORE THAN TRANSPORT ADDRESSING AND SEGMENTATION ! 592: ! 593: \item ``A'' NETWORKS ! 594: \end{nrtc} ! 595: ! 596: \item TP1: BASIC ERROR RECOVERY CLASS ! 597: \begin{nrtc} ! 598: \item RECOVER FROM NETWORK RESETS\\ (MAY INVOLVE RE-ROUTING) ! 599: ! 600: \item ``B'' NETWORKS ! 601: \end{nrtc} ! 602: \end{nrtc} ! 603: \end{bwslide} ! 604: ! 605: ! 606: \begin{bwslide} ! 607: \ctitle {PROTOCOLS USING\\ CO-MODE NETWORK SERVICE (cont.)} ! 608: ! 609: \begin{nrtc} ! 610: \item TP2: MULTIPLEXING CLASS ! 611: \begin{nrtc} ! 612: \item MULTIPLEX OVER A SINGLE NETWORK CONNECTION ! 613: ! 614: \item OPTIONAL FLOW CONTROL ! 615: ! 616: \item ``A'' NETWORKS ! 617: \end{nrtc} ! 618: ! 619: \item TP3: ERROR RECOVERY AND MULTIPLEXING CLASS ! 620: \begin{nrtc} ! 621: \item ALL OF THE ABOVE ! 622: ! 623: \item ``B'' NETWORKS ! 624: \end{nrtc} ! 625: \end{nrtc} ! 626: \end{bwslide} ! 627: ! 628: ! 629: \begin{bwslide} ! 630: \ctitle {PROTOCOLS WHICH CAN USE\\ CL-MODE NETWORK SERVICE} ! 631: ! 632: \begin{nrtc} ! 633: \item TP4: ERROR DETECTION AND RECOVERY CLASS ! 634: \begin{nrtc} ! 635: \item RELIABILITY THROUGH RETRANSMISSION ! 636: ! 637: \item ``C'' NETWORKS ! 638: \end{nrtc} ! 639: \end{nrtc} ! 640: \end{bwslide} ! 641: ! 642: ! 643: \begin{bwslide} ! 644: \part* {APPLICATION USE OF END-TO-END SERVICES}\bf ! 645: ! 646: \begin{nrtc} ! 647: \item APPLICATION IDENTIFIES APPLICATION ENTITY WHICH PROVIDES ! 648: DESIRED SERVICE ! 649: \begin{nrtc} ! 650: \item e.g., AN FTAM APPLICATION IDENTIFIES A FILESTORE SERVICE ! 651: PROVIDED BY A PARTICULAR APPLICATION ENTITY ! 652: \end{nrtc} ! 653: ! 654: \item THE APPLICATION ENTITY IS IDENTIFIED BY ITS DISTINGUISHED NAME IN ! 655: THE OSI DIRECTORY ! 656: \end{nrtc} ! 657: \end{bwslide} ! 658: ! 659: ! 660: \begin{bwslide} ! 661: \ctitle {STEP 1:\\ MAP DISTINGUISHED NAME\\ TO PRESENTATION ADDRESS} ! 662: ! 663: \begin{nrtc} ! 664: \item ESTABLISH ASSOCIATION TO DIRECTORY SERVICE AGENT (DSA) ! 665: USING DIRECTORY ACCESS PROTOCOL (DAP) ! 666: ! 667: \item RETRIEVE THE \verb"presentationAddress" ATTRIBUTE FROM ! 668: THE OBJECT WITH THE GIVEN DISTINGUISHED NAME ! 669: \end{nrtc} ! 670: ! 671: \begin{quote}\small\begin{verbatim} ! 672: PSAPaddr ::= ! 673: SEQUENCE { ! 674: pSelector[0] ! 675: OCTET STRING ! 676: OPTIONAL, ! 677: ! 678: sSelector[1] ! 679: OCTET STRING ! 680: OPTIONAL, ! 681: ! 682: tSelector[2] ! 683: OCTET STRING ! 684: OPTIONAL, ! 685: ! 686: nAddresses[3] ! 687: SET OF (1..MAX) OCTET STRING ! 688: } ! 689: \end{verbatim}\end{quote} ! 690: \end{bwslide} ! 691: ! 692: ! 693: \begin{bwslide} ! 694: \ctitle {STEP 2:\\ DETERMINE USE OF NETWORK ADDRESSES} ! 695: ! 696: \begin{nrtc} ! 697: \item PRESENTATION ADDRESS IS GIVEN TO THE ASSOCIATION CONTROL SERVICE ! 698: ELEMENT (ACSE), WHICH ESTABLISHES THE ASSOCIATION ! 699: ! 700: \item ACSE PASSES THE ADDRESS TO THE PRESENTATION SERVICE, ! 701: WHICH USES THE PRESENTATION SELECTOR ! 702: ! 703: \item THE REMAINDER IS GIVEN TO THE SESSION SERVICE, ! 704: WHICH USES THE SESSION SELECTOR ! 705: ! 706: \item THE REMAINDER IS GIVEN TO THE TRANSPORT SERVICE ! 707: \end{nrtc} ! 708: \end{bwslide} ! 709: ! 710: ! 711: \begin{bwslide} ! 712: \ctitle {STEP 2 (cont.)} ! 713: ! 714: \begin{nrtc} ! 715: \item TRANSPORT SERVICE LOOKS AT EACH NETWORK ADDRESS AND MUST DECIDE ! 716: \begin{nrtc} ! 717: \item WHICH MODE NETWORK SERVICE WILL BE USED FOR THIS ADDRESS ! 718: \end{nrtc} ! 719: ! 720: \item TRANSPORT SERVICE SELECTS A TRANSPORT PROTOCOL BASED ON THE ! 721: DERIVED NETWORK SERVICE AND THE COMMUNICATIONS QUALITY OF SERVICE (QOS) ! 722: DESIRED BY THE APPLICATION ! 723: ! 724: \item THIS COMBINATION ! 725: \begin{nrtc} ! 726: \item (NETWORK SERVICE+TRANSPORT PROTOCOL) ! 727: \end{nrtc} ! 728: IS TERMED A ! 729: \begin{nrtc} ! 730: \item TRANSPORT SERVICE STACK (TS-STACK) ! 731: \end{nrtc} ! 732: \end{nrtc} ! 733: \end{bwslide} ! 734: ! 735: ! 736: \begin{bwslide} ! 737: \ctitle {STILL MORE ON\\ STEP 2} ! 738: ! 739: \begin{nrtc} ! 740: \item IN MANY ENVIRONMENTS ONLY A SINGLE MODE OF NETWORK SERVICE AND A ! 741: SINGLE TRANSPORT PROTOCOL ARE AVAILABLE ! 742: ! 743: \item THIS IMPLIES THAT ONLY A SUBSET (OR PERHAPS NONE) OF THE ! 744: NETWORK ADDRESSES WILL BE USABLE AT THE ORIGINATING END-SYSTEM ! 745: \end{nrtc} ! 746: \end{bwslide} ! 747: ! 748: ! 749: \begin{bwslide} ! 750: \ctitle {STEP 3:\\ ORDER NETWORK ADDRESSES} ! 751: ! 752: \begin{nrtc} ! 753: \item THE NETWORK ADDRESSES ARE THEN ORDERED BY PREFERENCE ! 754: ! 755: \item PREFERENCE IS BASED BOTH ON COMMUNICATIONS-QOS AND ``CLOSENESS'' ! 756: OF NETWORK ADDRESSES ! 757: ! 758: \item FOR EXAMPLE: ! 759: \begin{nrtc} ! 760: \item TWO NETWORK ADDRESSES, EACH IMPLYING A CO-MODE NETWORK ! 761: SERVICE, MIGHT BE PRESENT ! 762: ! 763: \item ONE OF THE NETWORK ADDRESS MIGHT BELONG TO A PRIVATE ! 764: NETWORK, WHILST THE OTHER BELONGS TO A PDN ! 765: ! 766: \item THE TRANSPORT SERVICE MIGHT PREFER THE PRIVATE NETWORK, ! 767: FOR COST REASONS ! 768: \end{nrtc} ! 769: \end{nrtc} ! 770: \end{bwslide} ! 771: ! 772: ! 773: \begin{bwslide} ! 774: \ctitle {STEP 4:\\ ATTEMPT CONNECTIONS} ! 775: ! 776: \begin{nrtc} ! 777: \item FOR EACH NETWORK ADDRESS: ! 778: \begin{nrtc} ! 779: \item THE APPROPRIATE TRANSPORT PROTOCOL ENGINE IS STARTED, ! 780: AND THE NETWORK SERVICE INVOKED ! 781: ! 782: \item ONCE A TRANSPORT CONNECTION IS ESTABLISHED, ! 783: THE REMAINDER OF THE NETWORK ADDRESSES ARE IGNORED ! 784: \end{nrtc} ! 785: \end{nrtc} ! 786: \end{bwslide} ! 787: ! 788: ! 789: \begin{bwslide} ! 790: \part* {EMULATION OF OSI END-TO-END SERVICES}\bf ! 791: ! 792: \begin{nrtc} ! 793: \item IS IT POSSIBLE TO PROVIDE OSI APPLICATIONS IN NON-OSI NETWORKS? ! 794: ! 795: \item A SOLUTION IS OFFERED BY LAYERING ! 796: \begin{nrtc} ! 797: \item THE OSI TRANSPORT \underline{SERVICE} IS VERY SIMPLE ! 798: \end{nrtc} ! 799: ! 800: \item CAN WE BUILD TS-STACKS USING NON-OSI PROTOCOLS? ! 801: \end{nrtc} ! 802: \end{bwslide} ! 803: ! 804: ! 805: \begin{bwslide} ! 806: \ctitle {SERVICE EMULATOR AT TRANSPORT} ! 807: ! 808: \vskip.5in ! 809: \diagram[p]{figureE-13} ! 810: \end{bwslide} ! 811: ! 812: ! 813: \begin{bwslide} ! 814: \ctitle {APPROACH:\\ TRANSPORT SERVICE\\ CONVERGENCE PROTOCOL} ! 815: ! 816: \begin{nrtc} ! 817: \item USE THE CONNECTION-ORIENTED TRANSPORT SERVICE PROVIDED BY ! 818: THE NON-OSI PROTOCOL SUITE ! 819: ! 820: \item DEFINE A ``TSCP'' WHICH SMOOTHS OVER THE DIFFERENCES IN THE SERVICES ! 821: OFFERED ! 822: \begin{nrtc} ! 823: \item IN PRACTICE, THESE ARE QUITE SMALL ! 824: \end{nrtc} ! 825: ! 826: \item FOR EXAMPLE, THE RFC1006 METHOD DEFINES A TSCP FOR TCP/IP NETWORKS ! 827: \end{nrtc} ! 828: \end{bwslide} ! 829: ! 830: ! 831: \begin{bwslide} ! 832: \ctitle {OSI TRANSPORT SERVICES\\ ON TOP OF THE TCP} ! 833: ! 834: \vskip.25in ! 835: \diagram[p]{figureE-14} ! 836: \end{bwslide} ! 837: ! 838: ! 839: \begin{bwslide} ! 840: \part {ACHIEVING CONNECTIVITY}\bf ! 841: ! 842: \begin{nrtc} ! 843: \item THE REAL WORLD OF OSI ! 844: ! 845: \item INTERIM USE OF NETWORK ADDRESSES ! 846: ! 847: \item TRANSPORT BRIDGING ! 848: \end{nrtc} ! 849: \end{bwslide} ! 850: ! 851: ! 852: \begin{bwslide} ! 853: \ctitle {NOW THE HARD PART} ! 854: ! 855: \begin{nrtc} ! 856: \item A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY IS AVAILABLE ! 857: ! 858: \item BUT PRACTICALLY, CAN THIS BE MADE TO WORK? ! 859: \end{nrtc} ! 860: \end{bwslide} ! 861: ! 862: ! 863: \begin{bwslide} ! 864: \part* {THE REAL WORLD OF OSI}\bf ! 865: ! 866: \begin{nrtc} ! 867: \item THE ``REAL WORLD'' DEPENDS ENTIRELY WHERE YOU LIVE ! 868: ! 869: \item A COMMUNITY IS A COLLECTION OF END-SYSTEMS SHARING COMPATIBLE ! 870: TS-STACKS AND CONNECTED TOGETHER ! 871: ! 872: \item WHAT KIND OF OSI COMMUNITIES EXIST TODAY? ! 873: \end{nrtc} ! 874: \end{bwslide} ! 875: ! 876: ! 877: \begin{bwslide} ! 878: \ctitle {COMMUNITY 1:\\ INTERNATIONAL X.25} ! 879: ! 880: \begin{nrtc} ! 881: \item X.121 FORMAT ADDRESSES ARE USED ! 882: ! 883: \item NETWORK PROTOCOL IS X.25(80) WHICH DOES NOT PROVIDE TRUE ! 884: OSI NETWORK SERVICE ! 885: \begin{nrtc} ! 886: \item EVENTUALLY UPGRADING TO X.25(84) ! 887: \end{nrtc} ! 888: ! 889: \item TP0 IS FAVORED TRANSPORT PROTOCOL ! 890: ! 891: \item TS-STACKS: ! 892: \end{nrtc} ! 893: ! 894: \diagram[p]{figureE-7} ! 895: \end{bwslide} ! 896: ! 897: ! 898: \begin{bwslide} ! 899: \ctitle {COMMUNITY 2:\\ PRIVATE X.25} ! 900: ! 901: \begin{nrtc} ! 902: \item SIMILAR TO INTERNATIONAL X.25 COMMUNITY, ! 903: BUT OWNED BY A PARTICULAR ENTERPRISE ! 904: \begin{nrtc} ! 905: \item e.g., THE U.K.~JOINT ACADEMIC NETWORK (JANET) ! 906: \end{nrtc} ! 907: ! 908: \item ADDRESSES ARE X.121-BASED, BUT ARE PRIVATELY ALLOCATED ! 909: \begin{nrtc} ! 910: \item THUS THE X.121 NETWORK ADDRESS FORMAT CAN'T BE USED ! 911: \end{nrtc} ! 912: ! 913: \item TS-STACKS: ! 914: \end{nrtc} ! 915: ! 916: \diagram[p]{figureE-7} ! 917: \end{bwslide} ! 918: ! 919: ! 920: \begin{bwslide} ! 921: \ctitle {COMMUNITY 3:\\ VARIANT U.S. USE OF X.25} ! 922: ! 923: \begin{nrtc} ! 924: \item X.25 TREATED AS A SUBNETWORK PROTOCOL ! 925: ! 926: \item CL-MODE NETWORK SERVICE RUN OVER THIS ! 927: ! 928: \item TS-STACKS: ! 929: \end{nrtc} ! 930: ! 931: \diagram[p]{figureE-9} ! 932: \end{bwslide} ! 933: ! 934: ! 935: \begin{bwslide} ! 936: \ctitle {COMMUNITY 4:\\ CONS-BASED LANS} ! 937: ! 938: \begin{nrtc} ! 939: \item CO-MODE NETWORK SERVICE OFFERRED OVER 8802 SUBNETWORK ! 940: ! 941: \item COMMONLY TERMED ``X.25 OVER ETHERNET'' (LLC2) ! 942: ! 943: \item TS-STACKS: ! 944: \end{nrtc} ! 945: ! 946: \diagram[p]{figureE-10} ! 947: \end{bwslide} ! 948: ! 949: ! 950: \begin{bwslide} ! 951: \ctitle {COMMUNITY 5:\\ CLNS-BASED LANS} ! 952: ! 953: \begin{nrtc} ! 954: \item CL-MODE NETWORK SERVICE OFFERRED OVER 8802 SUBNETWORK ! 955: ! 956: \item COMMONLY TERMED ``MAP/TOP LANs'' (LLC1) ! 957: ! 958: \item TS-STACKS: ! 959: \end{nrtc} ! 960: ! 961: \diagram[p]{figureE-11} ! 962: \end{bwslide} ! 963: ! 964: ! 965: \begin{bwslide} ! 966: \ctitle {COMMUNITY 6:\\ TCP/IP-BASED INTERNET USING RFC1006} ! 967: ! 968: \begin{nrtc} ! 969: \item RFC1006 DEFINES A MAPPING FROM THE OSI TRANSPORT SERVICE ONTO THE TCP ! 970: ! 971: \item PROBLEM: WHAT FORMAT TO USE NETWORK ADDRESS? ! 972: ! 973: \item TS-STACKS: ! 974: \end{nrtc} ! 975: ! 976: \diagram[p]{figureE-12} ! 977: \end{bwslide} ! 978: ! 979: ! 980: \begin{bwslide} ! 981: \ctitle {COMMUNITY 7:\\ TCP/IP-BASED LAN USING RFC1006} ! 982: ! 983: \begin{nrtc} ! 984: \item SIMILAR TO INTERNET COMMUNITY, ! 985: BUT ON AN ISOLATED TCP/IP LAN ! 986: \begin{nrtc} ! 987: \item e.g., A CAMPUS NETWORK RUNNING TCP/IP LOCALLY AND HAVING A ! 988: CONNECTION TO A PDN ! 989: \end{nrtc} ! 990: ! 991: \item TS-STACKS: ! 992: \end{nrtc} ! 993: ! 994: \diagram[p]{figureE-12} ! 995: \end{bwslide} ! 996: ! 997: ! 998: \begin{bwslide} ! 999: \ctitle {COMMUNITY INTEROPERATION} ! 1000: ! 1001: \begin{nrtc} ! 1002: \item SO, THERE ARE (AT LEAST) SEVEN DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES IN THE OSI WORLD ! 1003: ! 1004: \item IDEALLY WOULD LIKE THIS INTERWORKING MATRIX: ! 1005: \end{nrtc} ! 1006: ! 1007: \diagram[p]{figureE-15} ! 1008: \end{bwslide} ! 1009: ! 1010: ! 1011: \begin{bwslide} ! 1012: \ctitle {COMMUNITY INTEROPERATION (cont.)} ! 1013: ! 1014: \begin{nrtc} ! 1015: \item COMMUNITY 7 IS ISOLATED BY LACK OF CONNECTIVITY ! 1016: \end{nrtc} ! 1017: ! 1018: \diagram[p]{figureE-16} ! 1019: \end{bwslide} ! 1020: ! 1021: ! 1022: \begin{bwslide} ! 1023: \ctitle {COMMUNITY INTEROPERATION (cont.)} ! 1024: ! 1025: \begin{nrtc} ! 1026: \item PRIVATE X.25 AND RFC1006--BASED COMMUNITIES NEED DIFFERENT ADDRESS ! 1027: SPACE ! 1028: \end{nrtc} ! 1029: ! 1030: \diagram[p]{figureE-17} ! 1031: \end{bwslide} ! 1032: ! 1033: ! 1034: \begin{bwslide} ! 1035: \ctitle {REAL WORLD CONNECTIVITY MATRIX} ! 1036: ! 1037: \begin{nrtc} ! 1038: \item IN PRACTICE, CONS-BASED LANS DON'T INTEROPERATE WITH CONS-BASED WANS ! 1039: \begin{nrtc} ! 1040: \item ROUTING OF CONS-BASED SUBNETWORKS ISN'T WIDELY IMPLEMENTED ! 1041: OUTSIDE OF X.75 ! 1042: \end{nrtc} ! 1043: \end{nrtc} ! 1044: ! 1045: \diagram[p]{figureE-18} ! 1046: \end{bwslide} ! 1047: ! 1048: ! 1049: \begin{bwslide} ! 1050: \ctitle {COMMUNITY INTEROPERATION (cont.)} ! 1051: ! 1052: \begin{nrtc} ! 1053: \item CLNS-BASED AND CONS-BASED TS-STACKS DON'T ALWAYS INTEROPERATE ! 1054: \begin{nrtc} ! 1055: \item IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO START WITH TP4 AND DOWN-NEGOTIATE ! 1056: \end{nrtc} ! 1057: \end{nrtc} ! 1058: ! 1059: \diagram[p]{figureE-19} ! 1060: \end{bwslide} ! 1061: ! 1062: ! 1063: \begin{bwslide} ! 1064: \ctitle {THE MYTH OF TRANSPORT NEGOTIATION} ! 1065: ! 1066: \begin{nrtc} ! 1067: \item IF INITIATOR SELECTS TP4, MUST ALSO DECIDE CONS/CLNS ! 1068: \begin{nrtc} ! 1069: \item IF CLNS IS USED, THEN MUST STAY WITH TP4 ! 1070: ! 1071: \item IF CLNS ISN'T USED, THEN CAN'T TALK TO CLNS-BASED LAN ! 1072: \end{nrtc} ! 1073: \end{nrtc} ! 1074: \end{bwslide} ! 1075: ! 1076: ! 1077: \begin{bwslide} ! 1078: \part* {INTERIM USE OF NETWORK ADDRESSES}\bf ! 1079: ! 1080: \begin{nrtc} ! 1081: \item WANT TO ACCOMODATE ALL OSI COMMUNITIES IN OSI DIRECTORY ! 1082: ! 1083: \item PROBLEM: ALL ADDRESSES MUST CONFORM TO DIRECTORY DEFINED SYNTAX ! 1084: ! 1085: \item PROBLEM: ALL ADDRESSES MUST BE GLOBALLY UNIQUE YET LOCALLY ! 1086: INTERPRETABLE ! 1087: ! 1088: \item SOLUTION: KILLE'S INTERIM APPROACH ! 1089: \end{nrtc} ! 1090: \end{bwslide} ! 1091: ! 1092: ! 1093: \begin{bwslide} ! 1094: \ctitle {CONFORMANCE TO\\ DIRECTORY DEFINED SYNTAX} ! 1095: ! 1096: \begin{nrtc} ! 1097: \item A PROBLEM FOR THE PRIVATE X.25 AND RFC1006--BASED COMMUNITIES ! 1098: ! 1099: \item TAKE A PART OF THE SPACE ASSIGNED TO TELEX ADDRESSES ! 1100: \begin{nrtc} ! 1101: \item NO ONE WILL USE TELEX AFI FOR NETWORK ADDRESSES ! 1102: \end{nrtc} ! 1103: ! 1104: \item SUB-DIVIDE THIS ADDRESS SPACE FOR EACH COMMUNITY, e.g., ! 1105: \begin{nrtc} ! 1106: \item AFI = 54 ! 1107: ! 1108: \item IDI = 00728722 ! 1109: \end{nrtc} ! 1110: \end{nrtc} ! 1111: ! 1112: \diagram[p]{figureE-8} ! 1113: \end{bwslide} ! 1114: ! 1115: ! 1116: \begin{bwslide} ! 1117: \ctitle {INTERPRETATION OF ADDRESSES} ! 1118: ! 1119: \begin{nrtc} ! 1120: \item FROM EACH NETWORK ADDRESS ! 1121: \begin{nrtc} ! 1122: \item COMMUNITY (TS-STACK, IDENTITY OF NETWORK) MUST BE DEDUCIBLE ! 1123: ! 1124: \item NETWORK-SPECIFIC INFORMATION (i.e., SNPA) MUST BE DEDUCIBLE ! 1125: \end{nrtc} ! 1126: \end{nrtc} ! 1127: \end{bwslide} ! 1128: ! 1129: ! 1130: \begin{bwslide} ! 1131: \part* {TRANSPORT BRIDGING}\bf ! 1132: ! 1133: \begin{nrtc} ! 1134: \item PROBLEM: SUPPOSE THE ORIGINATING END-SYSTEM DETERMINES THAT ! 1135: IT IS IN A DIFFERENT COMMUNITY THAN THE DESTINATION END-SYSTEM ! 1136: ! 1137: \item FROM A PURIST PERSPECTIVE: ! 1138: \begin{nrtc} ! 1139: \item INTEROPERATION CAN NOT OCCUR! ! 1140: \end{nrtc} ! 1141: ! 1142: \item FROM A PRAGMATIC PERSPECTIVE: ! 1143: \begin{nrtc} ! 1144: \item IGNORE THE CURSED MODEL AND BUILD A LEVEL-4 RELAY ! 1145: \end{nrtc} ! 1146: ! 1147: \item FOR AN AMUSING READ, TRY ISO/DTR10172 ! 1148: \end{nrtc} ! 1149: \end{bwslide} ! 1150: ! 1151: ! 1152: \begin{bwslide} ! 1153: \ctitle {TS-BRIDGES} ! 1154: ! 1155: \begin{nrtc} ! 1156: \item ALTHOUGH MANY DIFFERENT TS-STACKS EXIST, ! 1157: THEY ALL PROVIDE THE SAME TRANSPORT SERVICE ! 1158: ! 1159: \item SO, IT IS STRAIGHT-FORWARD TO BUILD A BOX THAT: ! 1160: \begin{nrtc} ! 1161: \item KNOWS NOTHING ABOUT TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS, BUT ! 1162: ! 1163: \item KNOWS HOW TO USE THE RELATIVELY SIMPLE OSI TRANSPORT SERVICE ! 1164: \end{nrtc} ! 1165: ! 1166: \item A TS-BRIDGE ``COPIES'' SERVICE PRIMITIVES FROM ONE TS-STACK TO THE ! 1167: OTHER, e.g., ! 1168: \begin{nrtc} ! 1169: \item UPON RECEIVING A T-CONNECT.INDICATION PRIMITIVE FROM ONE ! 1170: TS-STACK, ! 1171: ! 1172: \item IT ISSUES A T-CONNECT.REQUEST PRIMITIVE TO THE OTHER TS-STACK ! 1173: \end{nrtc} ! 1174: \end{nrtc} ! 1175: \end{bwslide} ! 1176: ! 1177: ! 1178: \begin{bwslide} ! 1179: \ctitle {TS-BRIDGES (cont.)} ! 1180: ! 1181: \vskip.5in ! 1182: \diagram[p]{figureE-1} ! 1183: \end{bwslide} ! 1184: ! 1185: ! 1186: \begin{bwslide} ! 1187: \ctitle {THE PROBLEMS OF LEVEL-4 RELAYS} ! 1188: ! 1189: \begin{nrtc} ! 1190: \item THE TS-BRIDGE MAINTAINS STATE AS TO THE EXISTING CONNECTIONS ! 1191: ! 1192: \item EACH TS-STACK PROVIDES A CHECKSUM, ! 1193: NEITHER OF WHICH IS REALLY END-TO-END ! 1194: \begin{nrtc} ! 1195: \item (CHECKSUM AT EITHER TRANSPORT OR NETWORK SERVICE) ! 1196: \end{nrtc} ! 1197: ! 1198: \item THIS ALSO DEFEATS TRANSPORT-LEVEL ENCRYPTION ! 1199: ! 1200: \item \underline{MAY} THWART SOPHISTICATED BACK-PRESSURE TECHNIQUES ! 1201: \end{nrtc} ! 1202: \end{bwslide} ! 1203: ! 1204: ! 1205: \begin{bwslide} ! 1206: \ctitle {AND WHAT ABOUT?} ! 1207: ! 1208: \begin{nrtc} ! 1209: \item ACCOUNTING ! 1210: ! 1211: \item ACCESS CONTROL ! 1212: ! 1213: \item LOAD BALANCING ! 1214: ! 1215: \item CONCATENATION OF TS-BRIDGES ! 1216: ! 1217: \item and so on$\ldots$ ! 1218: \end{nrtc} ! 1219: \end{bwslide} ! 1220: ! 1221: ! 1222: \begin{bwslide} ! 1223: \ctitle {USE OF THE TS-BRIDGE} ! 1224: ! 1225: \begin{nrtc} ! 1226: \item MUST NOW SUBTLY MODIFY TRANSPORT SERVICE OF ORIGINATING END-SYSTEM ! 1227: \begin{nrtc} ! 1228: \item STEP 2: DETERMINE USE OF NETWORK ADDRESSES ! 1229: \end{nrtc} ! 1230: ! 1231: \item IF NO USABLE NETWORK ADDRESSES ARE AVAILABLE ! 1232: ! 1233: \item THEN SELECT A TS-BRIDGE WHICH SERVICES THE OSI COMMUNITY FOR ONE OF ! 1234: THE NETWORK ADDRESSES ! 1235: \begin{nrtc} ! 1236: \item RECALL, OSI COMMUNITY EQUALS TS-STACK PLUS CONNECTIVITY ! 1237: \end{nrtc} ! 1238: \end{nrtc} ! 1239: \end{bwslide} ! 1240: ! 1241: ! 1242: \begin{bwslide} ! 1243: \ctitle {USE OF THE TS-BRIDGE (cont.)} ! 1244: ! 1245: \begin{nrtc} ! 1246: \item ENCODE THE NETWORK ADDRESS AND TRANSPORT SELECTOR AS AN OCTET STRING, ! 1247: \begin{nrtc} ! 1248: \item (USING KILLE'S STRING FORMAT) ! 1249: \end{nrtc} ! 1250: CALL THIS THE NEW TRANSPORT SELECTOR ! 1251: ! 1252: \item USE THE NETWORK ADDRESS OF THE TS-BRIDGE FOR THE REMAINING STEPS ! 1253: ! 1254: \item WHEN TS-BRIDGE RECEIVES CONNECTION, ! 1255: IT SIMPLY DECODES TRANSPORT SELECTOR TO FIND ADDRESS OF ! 1256: DESTINATION END-SYSTEM ! 1257: \end{nrtc} ! 1258: \end{bwslide} ! 1259: ! 1260: ! 1261: \begin{bwslide} ! 1262: \ctitle {TS-BRIDGE ADDRESSING} ! 1263: ! 1264: \vskip.5in ! 1265: \diagram[p]{figureE-20} ! 1266: \end{bwslide} ! 1267: ! 1268: ! 1269: \begin{bwslide} ! 1270: \part {COMPARISON TO TCP/IP}\bf ! 1271: ! 1272: \begin{nrtc} ! 1273: \item NETWORK SERVICE ! 1274: ! 1275: \item TRANSPORT SERVICE ! 1276: \end{nrtc} ! 1277: \end{bwslide} ! 1278: ! 1279: ! 1280: \begin{bwslide} ! 1281: \ctitle {COMPARISONS} ! 1282: ! 1283: \begin{nrtc} ! 1284: \item ALL COMPARISONS ARE PARTISAN IN NATURE ! 1285: ! 1286: \item HOWEVER, WITHOUT BIAS OR LOSS OF GENERALITY,\\ I CAN HONESTLY STATE: ! 1287: \begin{nrtc} ! 1288: \item THE OSI LOWER-LAYERS ARE CURRENTLY INCOHERENT ! 1289: \end{nrtc} ! 1290: \end{nrtc} ! 1291: \end{bwslide} ! 1292: ! 1293: ! 1294: \begin{bwslide} ! 1295: \part* {NETWORK SERVICE}\bf ! 1296: ! 1297: \begin{nrtc} ! 1298: \item THE INTERNET PROTOCOL (IP) PROVIDES A CL-NETWORK SERVICE ! 1299: \begin{nrtc} ! 1300: \item SIMILAR TO CLNP, BUT MORE EFFICIENT ! 1301: \end{nrtc} ! 1302: ! 1303: \item THE LEAST COMMON DENOMINATOR, USABLE OVER BOTH WANs AND LANs ! 1304: \begin{nrtc} ! 1305: \item BEST EFFORT DELIVERY ! 1306: ! 1307: \item RELIABILITY RESPONSIBILITY OF TRANSPORT SERVICE ! 1308: \end{nrtc} ! 1309: \end{nrtc} ! 1310: \end{bwslide} ! 1311: ! 1312: ! 1313: \begin{bwslide} ! 1314: \ctitle {ARE TWO OSI NETWORK SERVICES\\ ONE TOO MANY?} ! 1315: ! 1316: \begin{nrtc} ! 1317: \item IN A WORD: YES ! 1318: ! 1319: \item OSI COMMUNITIES ARE SEPERATED BY TS-STACKS AND CONNECTIVITY ! 1320: ! 1321: \item CONNECTIVITY ISN'T A TECHNICAL ISSUE ! 1322: ! 1323: \item BUT, TS-STACKS ARE, SO: ! 1324: \begin{nrtc} ! 1325: \item IF THERE WAS A SINGLE NETWORK SERVICE, ! 1326: THEN THERE COULD BE A SINGLE TRANSPORT PROTOCOL ! 1327: \end{nrtc} ! 1328: \end{nrtc} ! 1329: \end{bwslide} ! 1330: ! 1331: ! 1332: \begin{bwslide} ! 1333: \part* {TRANSPORT SERVICE}\bf ! 1334: ! 1335: \begin{nrtc} ! 1336: \item THE TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL (TCP) PROVIDES A CO-TRANSPORT ! 1337: SERVICE ! 1338: ! 1339: \item SEVERAL DIFFERENCES FROM THE OSI TRANSPORT SERVICE ! 1340: \begin{nrtc} ! 1341: \item TCP IS STREAM-ORIENTED ! 1342: ! 1343: \item TCP USES GRACEFUL RELEASE ! 1344: ! 1345: \item TCP USES URGENT DATA ! 1346: \end{nrtc} ! 1347: ! 1348: \item THESE ARE DIFFERENCES, NOT PROS AND CONS ! 1349: \end{nrtc} ! 1350: \end{bwslide} ! 1351: ! 1352: ! 1353: \begin{bwslide} ! 1354: \ctitle {COMPARISON OF PROTOCOLS} ! 1355: ! 1356: \begin{nrtc} ! 1357: \item REALLY CAN COMPARE ONLY THE TCP AND TP4 ! 1358: ! 1359: \item TP4 PACKET ORIENTATION PREVENTS USE OF SOPHISTICATED CONGESTION ! 1360: COLLAPSE ALGORITHMS ! 1361: ! 1362: \item TP4 PACKET ORIENTATION HELPS BUFFER MANAGEMENT, ! 1363: POSSIBLY MORE EFFICIENT ! 1364: ! 1365: \item TP4 RETRANSMISSION ALGORITHMS ARE SIMPLISTIC ! 1366: ! 1367: \item TP4 END-TO-END CHECKSUM IS INAPPROPRIATE ! 1368: \end{nrtc} ! 1369: \end{bwslide} ! 1370: ! 1371: ! 1372: \begin{bwslide} ! 1373: \ctitle {TRANSPORT BRIDGING} ! 1374: ! 1375: \begin{nrtc} ! 1376: \item UNNECESSARY IN TCP/IP WORLD ! 1377: \begin{nrtc} ! 1378: \item COMMON NETWORK PROTOCOL ! 1379: ! 1380: \item UNIFORM NETWORK ADDRESS FORMAT ! 1381: \begin{nrtc} ! 1382: \item (ALL IN 32--BITS!) ! 1383: \end{nrtc} ! 1384: \end{nrtc} ! 1385: \end{nrtc} ! 1386: \end{bwslide} ! 1387: ! 1388: ! 1389: \begin{bwslide} ! 1390: \part* {CONCLUSIONS}\bf ! 1391: ! 1392: \begin{nrtc} ! 1393: \item DEPRESSING ! 1394: \begin{nrtc} ! 1395: \item WORLD-WIDE OSI ``CAN'T HAPPEN'' ! 1396: ! 1397: \item THIS WILL CURTAIL USE OF WONDERFUL APPLICATIONS ! 1398: \end{nrtc} ! 1399: ! 1400: \item FORTUNATELY, CLOSED COMMUNITIES WILL BE RELATIVELY IMMUNE ! 1401: \end{nrtc} ! 1402: \end{bwslide} ! 1403:
This archive runs on limited infrastructure. Preserving old code on modern bandwidth. Automated agents are requested to crawl responsibly.