|
|
1.1 ! root 1: % run this through LaTeX with the appropriate wrapper ! 2: ! 3: \dotopic{TRANSITION AND\\ COEXISTENCE\\ WITH TCP/IP} ! 4: ! 5: ! 6: \begin{bwslide} ! 7: \part* {OUTLINE}\bf ! 8: ! 9: \begin{description} ! 10: \item[PART I:] MOTIVATION ! 11: ! 12: \item[PART II:] BACKGROUND ! 13: ! 14: \item[PART III:] PROTOCOL-BASED APPROACHES ! 15: ! 16: \item[PART IV:] SERVICE-BASED APPROACHES ! 17: ! 18: \item[PART V:] EXAMPLES ! 19: \end{description} ! 20: \end{bwslide} ! 21: ! 22: ! 23: \begin{bwslide} ! 24: \ctitle {A BIG ACKNOWLEDGEMENT} ! 25: ! 26: \begin{nrtc} ! 27: \item TRANSITION IS MOSTLY SMOKE AND MIRRORS ! 28: ! 29: \item THE PRACTICAL PERSPECTIVED PRESENTED HERE IS HEAVILY INFLUENCED BY ! 30: DISCUSSIONS WITH ! 31: \begin{nrtc} ! 32: \item EINAR A.~STEFFERUD (NMA) ! 33: ! 34: \item DAVID H.~CROCKER (DEC) ! 35: \end{nrtc} ! 36: \end{nrtc} ! 37: \end{bwslide} ! 38: ! 39: ! 40: \begin{bwslide} ! 41: \part {MOTIVATION}\bf ! 42: ! 43: \begin{nrtc} ! 44: \item THERE ARE MANY TCP/IP NETWORKS TODAY; THERE WILL BE MORE TOMORROW ! 45: ! 46: \item BY THE TIME OSI BECOMES A WORTHWHILE OPERATIONAL ALTERNATIVE, ! 47: THERE WILL BE MANY MORE TCP/IP NETWORKS THAN THERE ARE TODAY! ! 48: ! 49: \item PROBLEM: HOW TO PROTECT INSTALLED BASE? ! 50: ! 51: \item PROBLEM: HOW TO TRANSITION GRACEFULLY? ! 52: \end{nrtc} ! 53: \end{bwslide} ! 54: ! 55: ! 56: \begin{bwslide} ! 57: \ctitle {GROWTH OF TCP/IP} ! 58: ! 59: \begin{nrtc} ! 60: \item SALES OF TCP/IP-BASED TECHNOLOGY ! 61: \begin{nrtc} ! 62: \item PARTICULARLY IN EUROPE ! 63: \end{nrtc} ! 64: CONTINUES TO GROW ! 65: ! 66: \item SEVERAL TECHNICAL AND MARKET ASPECTS CONTRIBUTE TO THIS PHENOMENA: ! 67: \begin{nrtc} ! 68: \item SUPERIORITY OF TCP/IP IN LOWER-LAYER CONNECTIVITY ! 69: ! 70: \item MATURITY OF TCP/IP PRODUCTS\\ (e.g., RANGE OF PLATFORMS) ! 71: \end{nrtc} ! 72: ! 73: \item ALTHOUGH OSI WILL DOMINATE, IT DOESN'T YET ! 74: ! 75: \item HENCE, TCP/IP IS BECOMING MORE FIRMLY ENTRENCHED ! 76: \end{nrtc} ! 77: \end{bwslide} ! 78: ! 79: ! 80: \begin{bwslide} ! 81: \ctitle {FEAR AND LOATHING IN THE MARKET} ! 82: ! 83: \begin{nrtc} ! 84: \item F.U.D. IN THE MARKETPLACE: ! 85: \begin{quote}\em ! 86: ``All marketing is fear, uncertainty, and doubt.''\\ \raggedleft ! 87: -- Einar Stefferud, Network Management Associates ! 88: \end{quote} ! 89: ! 90: \item WHAT THE VENDORS SAY: ! 91: \begin{quote}\em ! 92: ``$\ldots$ protect your investment while assuring a path to an OSI ! 93: future.''\\ \raggedleft ! 94: -- Vendor A ! 95: \end{quote} ! 96: AND ! 97: \begin{quote}\em ! 98: ``$\ldots$ plans for a smooth, painless guaranteed migration to OSI standards ! 99: as they are approved.''\\ \raggedleft ! 100: --Vendor B ! 101: \end{quote} ! 102: AND ! 103: \begin{quote}\em ! 104: ``Once you've scrapped your existing production networks, ! 105: come to us for OSI. ! 106: It will be wonderful!''\\ \raggedleft ! 107: --Vendor C ! 108: \end{quote} ! 109: \end{nrtc} ! 110: \end{bwslide} ! 111: ! 112: ! 113: \begin{bwslide} ! 114: \ctitle {THE SAD TRUTH} ! 115: ! 116: \begin{quote}\em ! 117: ``You can't win, and you can't quit, but you \underline{can} reduce the ! 118: pain.''\\ \raggedleft ! 119: -- Marshall Rose, PSI, Inc. ! 120: \end{quote} ! 121: \end{bwslide} ! 122: ! 123: ! 124: \begin{bwslide} ! 125: \part {BACKGROUND}\bf ! 126: ! 127: \begin{nrtc} ! 128: \item CONCEPTS ! 129: ! 130: \item TERMINOLOGY ! 131: ! 132: \item HISTORY ! 133: ! 134: \item METRICS FOR COMPARISON ! 135: \end{nrtc} ! 136: \end{bwslide} ! 137: ! 138: ! 139: \begin{bwslide} ! 140: \ctitle {THE FUNDAMENTAL ASSUMPTION} ! 141: ! 142: \begin{nrtc} ! 143: \item TCP/IP IS HERE TODAY, WIDELY INSTALLED, AND USEFUL ! 144: ! 145: \item OSI WILL EVENTUALLY REPLACE TCP/IP AS THE OFF-THE-SHELF TECHNOLOGY FOR ! 146: BUILDING INTEROPERABLE SYSTMS ! 147: ! 148: \item BOTH WILL BE SIMULTANEOUSLY WIDESPREAD FOR QUITE SOME TIME ! 149: \begin{nrtc} ! 150: \item DURING WHICH OSI WILL GAIN DOMINANCE ! 151: \end{nrtc} ! 152: \end{nrtc} ! 153: \end{bwslide} ! 154: ! 155: ! 156: \begin{bwslide} ! 157: \part* {CONCEPTS}\bf ! 158: ! 159: \begin{nrtc} ! 160: \item TRANSITION: ! 161: \begin{nrtc} ! 162: \item TO MOVE FROM ONE PROTOCOL SUITE TO ANOTHER ! 163: \end{nrtc} ! 164: ! 165: \item COEXISTENCE: ! 166: \begin{nrtc} ! 167: \item TO LIVE TOGETHER WITHOUT HOSTILITY OR CONFLICT DESPITE ! 168: DIFFERENCES ! 169: \end{nrtc} ! 170: ! 171: \item MIGRATION: ! 172: \begin{nrtc} ! 173: \item TO MOVE BACK AND FORTH, AS THE SEASONS CHANGE ! 174: \end{nrtc} ! 175: \end{nrtc} ! 176: \end{bwslide} ! 177: ! 178: ! 179: \begin{bwslide} ! 180: \ctitle {MAPPINGS} ! 181: ! 182: \begin{nrtc} ! 183: \item TRANSITION AND COEXISTENCE CAN BE DESCRIBED BY THE MAPPINGS THEY ! 184: REQUIRE ! 185: ! 186: \item SOME MAPPINGS ARE SIMPLE ! 187: \begin{nrtc} ! 188: \item i.e., SYNTACTIC CHANGES ! 189: \end{nrtc} ! 190: ! 191: \item SOME MAPPINGS ARE COMPLEX ! 192: \begin{nrtc} ! 193: \item i.e., SEMANTIC CHANGES ! 194: \end{nrtc} ! 195: ! 196: \item THE MORE COMPLEX THE MAPPING, THE GREATER THE LOSS OF INFORMATION OR ! 197: INTENT ! 198: \end{nrtc} ! 199: \end{bwslide} ! 200: ! 201: ! 202: \begin{bwslide} ! 203: \part* {TERMINOLOGY}\bf ! 204: ! 205: \begin{nrtc} ! 206: \item WE'LL FAVOR OSI TERMINOLOGY, BUT STILL NEED SOME INTERNET (TCP/IP) ! 207: TERMINOLOGY ! 208: ! 209: \item TWO BASIC TERMS ! 210: \begin{nrtc} ! 211: \item GATEWAY: GENERIC TO ANY LEVEL, COMPLEX ! 212: ! 213: \item BRIDGE: GENERIC TO ANY LEVEL, SIMPLE ! 214: \end{nrtc} ! 215: \end{nrtc} ! 216: \end{bwslide} ! 217: ! 218: ! 219: \begin{bwslide} ! 220: \ctitle {SERVICE SEMANTICS} ! 221: ! 222: \begin{nrtc} ! 223: \item STORE-AND-FORWARD ! 224: \begin{nrtc} ! 225: \item SERVICE SEMANTICS CARRIED MULTI-HOP VIA FORWARDERS ! 226: \end{nrtc} ! 227: ! 228: \item END-TO-END ! 229: \begin{nrtc} ! 230: \item SERVICE SEMANTICS CARRIED FROM ORIGINATOR TO RECIPIENT ! 231: ! 232: \item MAY BE SUPPORTED BY AN UNDERYLING STORE-AND-FORWARD SERVICE ! 233: \end{nrtc} ! 234: \end{nrtc} ! 235: \end{bwslide} ! 236: ! 237: ! 238: \begin{bwslide} ! 239: \ctitle {SERVICE SEMANTICS (cont.)} ! 240: ! 241: \vskip.5in ! 242: \diagram[p]{figureT-3} ! 243: \end{bwslide} ! 244: ! 245: ! 246: \begin{bwslide} ! 247: \ctitle {PROTOCOL SUITE} ! 248: ! 249: \begin{nrtc} ! 250: \item A COLLECTION OF SERVICES AND PROTOCOLS RELATED: ! 251: \begin{nrtc} ! 252: \item ADMINISTRATIVELY, BY AN ORGANIZATION\\ (e.g., ISO/IEC); and, ! 253: ! 254: \item PHILOSOPHICALLY, BY A REFERENCE MODEL\\ (e.g., the OSIRM) ! 255: \end{nrtc} ! 256: ! 257: \item FOR OUR PURPOSES, THERE ARE ONLY TWO: ! 258: \begin{nrtc} ! 259: \item THE OSI SUITE OF PROTOCOLS ! 260: ! 261: \item THE INTERNET SUITE OF PROTOCOLS ! 262: \end{nrtc} ! 263: \end{nrtc} ! 264: \end{bwslide} ! 265: ! 266: ! 267: \begin{bwslide} ! 268: \ctitle {APPLICATIONS} ! 269: ! 270: \begin{nrtc} ! 271: \item APPLICATION CLASS ! 272: \begin{nrtc} ! 273: \item A SET OF APPLICATIONS RELATED TO A PARTICULAR ACTIVITY, ! 274: e.g., FILE TRANSFER, IRREGARDLESS OF PROTOCOL SUITE ! 275: \end{nrtc} ! 276: ! 277: \item APPLICATION INSTANCE ! 278: \begin{nrtc} ! 279: \item A MEMBER OF AN APPLICATION CLASS SPECIFIC TO A PARTICULAR ! 280: PROTOCOL SUITE, e.g., FTAM ! 281: \end{nrtc} ! 282: \end{nrtc} ! 283: \end{bwslide} ! 284: ! 285: ! 286: \begin{bwslide} ! 287: \part* {HISTORY}\bf ! 288: ! 289: \begin{nrtc} ! 290: \item A VERY BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO THE TWO PROTOCOL SUITES ! 291: ! 292: \item WE'LL ATTEMPT TO TAKE A NON-PARTISAN VIEW (ha!) ! 293: \end{nrtc} ! 294: \end{bwslide} ! 295: ! 296: ! 297: \begin{bwslide} ! 298: \ctitle {INTERNET SUITE} ! 299: ! 300: \begin{nrtc} ! 301: \item SPONSORED BY THE U.S.~DoD ! 302: \begin{nrtc} ! 303: \item GREW OUT OF EARLY (D)ARPA RESEARCH INTO SURVIVABLE NETWORKS ! 304: \end{nrtc} ! 305: BASIS FROM THE DoD INTERNET ARCHITECTURE MODEL ! 306: ! 307: \item SPECIFIED IN ``REQUEST FOR COMMENTS'' SERIES (RFCs) AND ! 308: U.S.~MILITARY STANDARDS (MILSTDs) ! 309: ! 310: \item CURRENT GENERATION PRIMARILY BASED ON ! 311: \begin{nrtc} ! 312: \item CONNECTION-ORIENTED TRANSPORT SERVICE, ! 313: PROVIDED BY THE TCP; AND, ! 314: ! 315: \item CONNECTIONLESS-MODE NETWORK SERVICE, ! 316: PROVIDED BY THE IP ! 317: \end{nrtc} ! 318: ! 319: \item MAJOR EMPHASIS ON CONNECTIVITY OF DIVERSE SUB-NETWORKS ! 320: \begin{nrtc} ! 321: \item EXCELLENT RESEARCH CONTINUES, TO THIS DAY, ON THESE ISSUES ! 322: \end{nrtc} ! 323: \end{nrtc} ! 324: \end{bwslide} ! 325: ! 326: ! 327: \begin{bwslide} ! 328: \ctitle {INTERNET SUITE (cont.)} ! 329: ! 330: \begin{nrtc} ! 331: \item SEVERAL PRODUCTION APPLICATIONS ! 332: \begin{nrtc} ! 333: \item SIMPLE MAIL TRANSFER PROTOCOL (SMTP) ! 334: ! 335: \item FILE TRANSFER PROTOCOL (FTP) ! 336: ! 337: \item TELNET (VIRTUAL TERMINAL PROTOCOL) ! 338: ! 339: \item DOMAIN NAME SYSTEM (DNS) ! 340: \end{nrtc} ! 341: ALL OF WHICH ARE RATHER SIMPLE ! 342: ! 343: \item APPLICATIONS CONTAIN THEIR OWN IMPLICIT SESSION AND PRESENTATION ! 344: MECHANISMS ! 345: ! 346: \item NOT SURPRISING, CONSIDERING THAT THESE APPLICATIONS ARE ALL BASED ON ! 347: 15~YEAR OLD MODELS! ! 348: \end{nrtc} ! 349: \end{bwslide} ! 350: ! 351: ! 352: \begin{bwslide} ! 353: \ctitle {INTERNET PROTOCOLS} ! 354: ! 355: \vskip.5in ! 356: \diagram[p]{figureT-4} ! 357: \end{bwslide} ! 358: ! 359: ! 360: \begin{bwslide} ! 361: \ctitle {OSI SUITE} ! 362: ! 363: \begin{nrtc} ! 364: \item SPONSORED BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY ! 365: \begin{nrtc} ! 366: \item IN PARTICULAR THE ISO ! 367: \end{nrtc} ! 368: BASIS FROM THE OSI REFERENCE MODEL (OSIRM) ! 369: ! 370: \item SPECIFIED IN ``STANDARDS'' (ISO/IEC) AND RECOMMENDATIONS (CCITT) ! 371: ! 372: \item BASED ON ! 373: \begin{nrtc} ! 374: \item CONNECTION-ORIENTED TRANSPORT SERVICE, ! 375: PROVIDED BY ONE OF FIVE DIFFERENT TPs; DEPENDING ON ! 376: ! 377: \item THE NETWORK SERVICE AVAILABLE (CONS or CLNS) ! 378: \end{nrtc} ! 379: ! 380: \item DIFFICULT TO IDENTIFY THE ``MAJOR'' EMPHASIS ! 381: \end{nrtc} ! 382: \end{bwslide} ! 383: ! 384: ! 385: \begin{bwslide} ! 386: \ctitle {OSI SUITE (cont.)} ! 387: ! 388: \begin{nrtc} ! 389: \item SEVERAL INTERESTING APPLICATIONS ! 390: \begin{nrtc} ! 391: \item MESSAGE HANDLING SYSTEMS (MHS) ! 392: ! 393: \item FILE TRANSFER, ACCESS AND MANAGEMENT (FTAM) ! 394: ! 395: \item VIRTUAL TERMINAL (VT) ! 396: ! 397: \item DIRECTORY SERVICES (DS) ! 398: \end{nrtc} ! 399: ! 400: \item APPLICATIONS EVOLVING QUITE HEAVILY OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS ! 401: ! 402: \item MUCH MORE AMBITIOUS THAN THEIR INTERNET COUNTERPARTS ! 403: \end{nrtc} ! 404: \end{bwslide} ! 405: ! 406: ! 407: \begin{bwslide} ! 408: %%%\ctitle {OSI PROTOCOLS} ! 409: ! 410: %%%\vskip.25in ! 411: \diagram[p]{figureT-5} ! 412: \end{bwslide} ! 413: ! 414: ! 415: \begin{bwslide} ! 416: \ctitle {A BRIEF COMPARISON} ! 417: ! 418: \begin{nrtc} ! 419: \item NOTE THAT CONCERNS DIFFER ! 420: \begin{nrtc} ! 421: \item NETWORK USERS: APPLICATION-LEVEL FUNCTIONALITY ! 422: ! 423: \item NETWORK ADMINISTRATORS: NETWORK AND TRANSPORT ISSUES ! 424: \end{nrtc} ! 425: ! 426: \item FOR APPLICATIONS, ONCE IMPLEMENTED, THE OSI SUITE IS SUPERIOR ! 427: ! 428: \item FOR NETWORK/TRANSPORT ISSUES, AT PRESENT, ! 429: THE INTERNET SUITE IS SUPERIOR ! 430: \end{nrtc} ! 431: \end{bwslide} ! 432: ! 433: ! 434: \begin{bwslide} ! 435: \part* {METRICS FOR COMPARISON}\bf ! 436: ! 437: \begin{nrtc} ! 438: \item CAN JUDGE A TRANSITION/COEXISTENCE SCHEME USING DIFFERENT ! 439: CRITERIA ! 440: ! 441: \item THE FOUR WE'LL FOCUS ON ARE ALL SUBJECTIVE; ! 442: \begin{nrtc} ! 443: \item TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS DO NOT EXIST IN A VACUUM ! 444: ! 445: \item THEY MUST BE EVALUATED IN THE CONTEXT OF A TARGET ENVIRONMENT ! 446: \end{nrtc} ! 447: \end{nrtc} ! 448: \end{bwslide} ! 449: ! 450: ! 451: \begin{bwslide} ! 452: \ctitle {METRICS FOR COMPARISON (cont.)} ! 453: ! 454: \begin{nrtc} ! 455: \item PERFORMANCE: ! 456: \begin{nrtc} ! 457: \item THROUGHPUT, LATENCY ! 458: ! 459: \item EFFECT ON OTHER APPLICATIONS ! 460: \end{nrtc} ! 461: ! 462: \item FLEXIBILITY: ! 463: \begin{nrtc} ! 464: \item RANGE OF APPLICABILITY ! 465: \end{nrtc} ! 466: \end{nrtc} ! 467: \end{bwslide} ! 468: ! 469: ! 470: \begin{bwslide} ! 471: \ctitle {METRICS FOR COMPARISON (cont.)} ! 472: ! 473: \begin{nrtc} ! 474: \item TRANSPARENCY: ! 475: \begin{nrtc} ! 476: \item USAGE CONTINUITY ! 477: ! 478: \item SEAMLESS USER INTERFACE ! 479: \end{nrtc} ! 480: ! 481: \item AMENABILITY: ! 482: \begin{nrtc} ! 483: \item MANAGEABILITY ! 484: \end{nrtc} ! 485: \end{nrtc} ! 486: \end{bwslide} ! 487: ! 488: ! 489: \begin{bwslide} ! 490: \ctitle {SEVERAL CANDIDATES} ! 491: ! 492: \begin{nrtc} ! 493: \item PROTOCOL-BASED APPROACHES ! 494: \begin{nrtc} ! 495: \item DUAL STACK ! 496: ! 497: \item APPLICATION GATEWAYS ! 498: ! 499: \item TRANSPORT GATEWAYS ! 500: \end{nrtc} ! 501: ! 502: \item SERVICE-BASED APPROACHES ! 503: \begin{nrtc} ! 504: \item TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES ! 505: ! 506: \item NETWORK TUNNELS ! 507: \end{nrtc} ! 508: ! 509: \item NONE OF THESE TECHNIQUES ARE SPECIFIC TO THE PROBLEM OF ! 510: \begin{nrtc} ! 511: \item INTERNET $\mapsto$ OSI ! 512: \end{nrtc} ! 513: \end{nrtc} ! 514: \end{bwslide} ! 515: ! 516: ! 517: \begin{bwslide} ! 518: \part {PROTOCOL-BASED APPROACHES}\bf ! 519: ! 520: \begin{nrtc} ! 521: \item THE ``STANDARD'' METHODS USED TO INTERCONNECT DIFFERENT ! 522: PROTOCOL STACKS ! 523: ! 524: \item THESE EMPHASIZE THE PROTOCOLS IN EACH STACK ! 525: ! 526: \item HENCE THEY REINFORCE THE BOUNDARIES BETWEEN TCP/IP AND OSI ! 527: \end{nrtc} ! 528: \end{bwslide} ! 529: ! 530: ! 531: \begin{bwslide} ! 532: \part* {DUAL STACK}\bf ! 533: ! 534: \begin{nrtc} ! 535: \item PUT BOTH PROTOCOL SUITES IN ALL HOSTS ! 536: ! 537: \item WORKS WELL, IF YOU CAN CHANGE \underline{EVERYTHING} ON THE NETWORK ! 538: \begin{quote}\em ! 539: ``Nice work, if you can get it.''\\ \raggedleft ! 540: -- Groucho Marx, Monkey Business, Paramount Pictures (1931) ! 541: \end{quote} ! 542: \end{nrtc} ! 543: \end{bwslide} ! 544: ! 545: ! 546: \begin{bwslide} ! 547: \ctitle {DUAL STACK (cont.)} ! 548: ! 549: \vskip.5in ! 550: \diagram[p]{figureT-1} ! 551: \end{bwslide} ! 552: ! 553: ! 554: \begin{bwslide} ! 555: \ctitle {TALKING TO UNI-STACK HOSTS} ! 556: ! 557: \begin{nrtc} ! 558: \item QUESTION: HOW TO DECIDE WHICH APPLICATION INSTANCE, ! 559: \begin{nrtc} ! 560: \item APPL-$\alpha$ OR APPL-$\gamma$, ! 561: \end{nrtc} ! 562: TO USE? ! 563: ! 564: \item TWO ANSWERS: ! 565: \begin{nrtc} ! 566: \item DEPEND ON THE USER TO KNOW AND INVOKE THE RIGHT PROGRAM ! 567: ! 568: \item DEVELOP A GENERIC APPLICATION WHICH SUPPORTS BOTH CLASSES ! 569: \end{nrtc} ! 570: ! 571: \item IN THE LATTER CASE, NEED AN UP-TO-DATE DIRECTORY TO DO THIS RELIABLY ! 572: \end{nrtc} ! 573: \end{bwslide} ! 574: ! 575: ! 576: \begin{bwslide} ! 577: \ctitle {GENERIC APPLICATION INSTANCE} ! 578: ! 579: \vskip.5in ! 580: \diagram[p]{figureT-6} ! 581: \end{bwslide} ! 582: ! 583: ! 584: \begin{bwslide} ! 585: \ctitle {AN IMPLEMENTATION OF DUAL-STACK} ! 586: ! 587: \begin{nrtc} ! 588: \item ENVIRONMENT: \unix/~SVR3 (STREAMS) ! 589: ! 590: \item ACCESS TO LOWER-LAYER PROTOCOLS VIA TRANSPORT LAYER INTERFACE (TLI) ! 591: ! 592: \item NOTE THAT ALTHOUGH TLI PROVIDES A UNIFORM INTERFACE, ! 593: IT DOES NOT PROVIDE A UNIFORM SERVICE: ! 594: \begin{nrtc} ! 595: \item PACKET- vs. STREAM-ORIENTATION ! 596: ! 597: \item GRACEFUL RELEASE ! 598: ! 599: \item EXPEDITED vs. URGENT DATA ! 600: ! 601: \item ADDRESSING ! 602: \end{nrtc} ! 603: \end{nrtc} ! 604: \end{bwslide} ! 605: ! 606: ! 607: \begin{bwslide} ! 608: \ctitle {GENERIC APPLICATION INSTANCE} ! 609: ! 610: \vskip.5in ! 611: \diagram[p]{figureT-11} ! 612: \end{bwslide} ! 613: ! 614: ! 615: \begin{bwslide} ! 616: \ctitle {SCORECARD} ! 617: ! 618: \begin{nrtc} ! 619: \item PERFORMANCE: NO DEGRADATION ! 620: ! 621: \item FLEXIBILITY: GOOD ! 622: ! 623: \item TRANSPARENCY: ! 624: \begin{nrtc} ! 625: \item ASSUMING REMOTE SYSTEM SUPPORTS AT LEAST ONE OF THE PROTOCOL ! 626: STACKS, THEN HIGH TRANSPARENCY BY USING COMMON SERVICE ! 627: INTERFACE ! 628: \end{nrtc} ! 629: ! 630: \item AMENABILITY: ! 631: \begin{nrtc} ! 632: \item BOTH END- AND INTERMEDIATE-SYSTEMS MUST RUN BOTH PROTOCOLS ! 633: ! 634: \item INTRODUCES ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS AS THERE ARE NOW TWO ! 635: LOGICAL NETWORKS ! 636: \begin{nrtc} ! 637: \item MANAGEMENT OF BOTH \underline{PLUS} CONTENTION BETWEEN THEM ! 638: \end{nrtc} ! 639: \end{nrtc} ! 640: \end{nrtc} ! 641: \end{bwslide} ! 642: ! 643: ! 644: \begin{bwslide} ! 645: \part* {APPLICATION GATEWAYS}\bf ! 646: ! 647: \begin{nrtc} ! 648: \item A WELL-KNOWN, BUT LITTLE-UNDERSTOOD TECHNOLOGY ! 649: \begin{nrtc} ! 650: \item USED IN MESSAGE HANDLING QUITE A BIT ! 651: \end{nrtc} ! 652: ! 653: \item MOST ARE QUITE TERRIBLE ! 654: \begin{quote}\em ! 655: ``Sometimes when you try to turn an apple into an orange you get back a ! 656: lemon.''\\ \raggedleft ! 657: -- Michael Padlipsky, The Elements of Networking Style (1985) ! 658: \end{quote} ! 659: \end{nrtc} ! 660: \end{bwslide} ! 661: ! 662: ! 663: \begin{bwslide} ! 664: \ctitle {APPLICATION GATEWAYS (cont.)} ! 665: ! 666: \vskip.5in ! 667: \diagram[p]{figureT-2} ! 668: \end{bwslide} ! 669: ! 670: ! 671: \begin{bwslide} ! 672: \ctitle {IMPERFECT MAPPINGS} ! 673: ! 674: \begin{nrtc} ! 675: \item BECAUSE THEY ARE AT THE HIGHEST LAYER IN THE STACK, ! 676: APPLICATION GATEWAYS TEND TO PERFORM SEMANTIC MAPPINGS ! 677: ! 678: \item THESE ARE ACCOMPANIED BY A LOSS OF INFORMATION ! 679: ! 680: \item SOMETIMES THE LOSS IS ONLY ANNOYING ! 681: \begin{nrtc} ! 682: \item e.g., ``FUNNY LOOKING'' MAIL ADDRESSES ! 683: \end{nrtc} ! 684: ! 685: \item SOMETIMES THE LOSS IS CATASTROPHIC ! 686: \begin{nrtc} ! 687: \item e.g., ROUTING LOOPS ! 688: \end{nrtc} ! 689: \end{nrtc} ! 690: \end{bwslide} ! 691: ! 692: ! 693: \begin{bwslide} ! 694: \ctitle {AN IMPLEMENATION OF APPLICATION-GATEWAY} ! 695: ! 696: \begin{nrtc} ! 697: \item TWO KINDS OF IMPLEMENATIONS ! 698: ! 699: \item STAGING (TRUE STORE-AND-FORWARD): ! 700: \begin{nrtc} ! 701: \item TOP-LEVEL PROTOCOL TRANSACTIONS ARE GROUPED AT THE GATEWAY ! 702: ! 703: \item REQUIRES LOCAL STORAGE, BUT MAY PERMIT BETTER MAPPINGS ! 704: \end{nrtc} ! 705: ! 706: \item IN-SITU (VIRTUAL END-TO-END): ! 707: \begin{nrtc} ! 708: \item NO PROTOCOL TRANSACTIONS ARE GROUPED ! 709: ! 710: \item MAPPINGS ARE ``ON THE FLY''\\ (AND PERHAPS LESS PRECISE) ! 711: ! 712: \item END-TO-END RESPONSE IS FASTER ! 713: \end{nrtc} ! 714: \end{nrtc} ! 715: \end{bwslide} ! 716: ! 717: ! 718: \begin{bwslide} ! 719: \ctitle {INVOKING THE GATEWAY} ! 720: ! 721: \vskip1.5in ! 722: \begin{verbatim} ! 723: % ftp file-gateway ! 724: Name (file-gateway:asterix): obelix@osi-host ! 725: Password: ! 726: \end{verbatim} ! 727: \end{bwslide} ! 728: ! 729: ! 730: \begin{bwslide} ! 731: \ctitle {A STAGING IMPLEMENTATION} ! 732: ! 733: \vskip.5in ! 734: \diagram[p]{figureT-12} ! 735: \end{bwslide} ! 736: ! 737: ! 738: \begin{bwslide} ! 739: \ctitle {AN IN-SITU IMPLEMENTATION} ! 740: ! 741: \vskip.5in ! 742: \diagram[p]{figureT-13} ! 743: \end{bwslide} ! 744: ! 745: ! 746: \begin{bwslide} ! 747: \ctitle {SCORECARD} ! 748: ! 749: \begin{nrtc} ! 750: \item PERFORMANCE: USUALLY POOR, BUT ACCEPTABLE FOR STORE-AND-FORWARD ! 751: APPLICATIONS ! 752: \begin{nrtc} ! 753: \item TYPICALLY ALSO INTRODUCES ADDITIONAL NETWORK TRAFFIC ! 754: \end{nrtc} ! 755: ! 756: \item FLEXIBILITY: NONE; EACH A-GWY IS A SPECIAL-PURPOSE SOFTWARE BOX ! 757: ! 758: \item TRANSPARENCY: ! 759: \begin{nrtc} ! 760: \item TO SERVICE: OFTEN LOSES SIGNIFICANT FUNCTIONALITY ! 761: ! 762: \item TO USERS: POSSIBLE, BUT NOT LIKELY (e.g., IN AN FTAM/FTP A-GWY, ! 763: USERS EMBED HOSTNAMES IN FILENAMES) ! 764: \end{nrtc} ! 765: ! 766: \item AMENABILITY: ! 767: \begin{nrtc} ! 768: \item REQUIRES NO END-SYSTEM MODIFICATION ! 769: ! 770: \item MAY INTRODUCE ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS ! 771: \end{nrtc} ! 772: \end{nrtc} ! 773: \end{bwslide} ! 774: ! 775: ! 776: \begin{bwslide} ! 777: \part* {TRANSPORT GATEWAYS}\bf ! 778: ! 779: \begin{nrtc} ! 780: \item IDEA: GATEWAY AT THE TRANSPORT LAYER SO AS TO AVOID NEEDING ! 781: MULTIPLE APPLICATION GATEWAYS ! 782: \begin{quote}\em ! 783: ``We could do it, but it would be wrong.''\\ \raggedleft ! 784: -- Richard Nixon, The Watergate Tapes (1974) ! 785: \end{quote} ! 786: ! 787: \item ALTHOUGH THE OSI (TP4) AND INTERNET (TCP) TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS DIFFER, ! 788: THE SERVICE IS QUITE SIMILAR ! 789: ! 790: \item HENCE, IT IS TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE TO PERFORM THE MAPPINGS ! 791: \begin{nrtc} ! 792: \item (ALTHOUGH IT'S A LOT OF HARD WORK) ! 793: \end{nrtc} ! 794: \end{nrtc} ! 795: \end{bwslide} ! 796: ! 797: ! 798: \begin{bwslide} ! 799: \ctitle {TRANSPORT GATEWAYS (cont.)} ! 800: ! 801: \vskip.5in ! 802: \diagram[p]{figureT-14} ! 803: \end{bwslide} ! 804: ! 805: ! 806: \begin{bwslide} ! 807: \ctitle {THE OBVIOUS QUESTION} ! 808: ! 809: \begin{nrtc} ! 810: \item WHAT APPLICATION DO YOU RUN WHEN USING THIS? ! 811: \begin{nrtc} ! 812: \item CAN'T RUN INTERNET APPLICATIONS IN THE OSI NETWORK, ! 813: SINCE THE TRANSPORT GATEWAY YIELDS OSI TRANSPORT SEMANTICS ! 814: ! 815: \item CAN'T RUN OSI APPLICATIONS IN THE INTERNET NETWORK, ! 816: SINCE THE TRANSPORT GATEWAY YIELDS INTERNET TRANSPORT SEMANTICS ! 817: \end{nrtc} ! 818: ! 819: \item THIS APPROACH FAILS BECAUSE IT PRESENTS DIFFERENT SERVICE SEMANTICS ! 820: IN EACH NETWORK ! 821: \end{nrtc} ! 822: \end{bwslide} ! 823: ! 824: ! 825: \begin{bwslide} ! 826: \part {SERVICE-BASED APPROACHES}\bf ! 827: ! 828: \begin{nrtc} ! 829: \item BY THE TIME OSI-BASED NETWORKS ARE TRULY WIDESPREAD, ! 830: TCP/IP-BASED NETWORKS WILL ALREADY OFFER A MIX OF SERVICES: ! 831: \begin{nrtc} ! 832: \item SUCH AS FTAM AND MHS, IN ADDITION TO FTP AND SMTP ! 833: \end{nrtc} ! 834: ! 835: \item IN OTHER WORDS, PERHAPS THE TRANSITION TO OSI BEGINS WITH NEW ! 836: APPLICATIONS ON HOSTS AND NO CHANGES TO THE NETWORK ! 837: \end{nrtc} ! 838: \end{bwslide} ! 839: ! 840: ! 841: \begin{bwslide} ! 842: \ctitle {WOULD THIS REALLY HAPPEN?} ! 843: ! 844: \begin{nrtc} ! 845: \item RECALL THAT USERS ARE INTERESTED IN \underline{SERVICES} NOT ! 846: \underline{PROTOCOLS} ! 847: ! 848: \item THE OSI APPLICATIONS ARE MUCH RICHER THAN THEIR INTERNET COUNTERPARTS ! 849: ! 850: \item IN CONTRAST, AT THE LOWER-LAYERS THE INTERNET SUITE ``WORKS BETTER'' ! 851: \begin{nrtc} ! 852: \item AS SUCH, IT IS UNLIKELY TO BE REPLACED BY THE OSI LOWER-LAYERS ! 853: FOR QUITE SOME TIME ! 854: \end{nrtc} ! 855: \end{nrtc} ! 856: \end{bwslide} ! 857: ! 858: ! 859: \begin{bwslide} ! 860: \ctitle {OBSERVATION} ! 861: ! 862: \begin{nrtc} ! 863: \item GIVEN THE ABOVE ASSUMPTION, IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT: ! 864: \begin{nrtc} ! 865: \item WE HAVE TWO COMMUNITIES USING THE SAME APPLICATIONS ! 866: (OSI), AND ! 867: ! 868: \item ONLY THE UNDERLYING ``TS-STACK'' WILL DIFFER BETWEEN THE TWO: ! 869: \begin{nrtc} ! 870: \item IN THE OSI COMMUNITY: TP4/CLNP/$\ldots$ ! 871: ! 872: \item IN THE TCP COMMUNITY: RFC1006/TCP/IP/$\ldots$ ! 873: \end{nrtc} ! 874: \end{nrtc} ! 875: ! 876: \item THIS LEADS US TO POSTULATE AN INTERESTING COEXISTENCE ! 877: STRATEGY: ! 878: \begin{nrtc} ! 879: \item LET'S RUN OSI APPLICATIONS, END-TO-END, BETWEEN THE TWO ! 880: \end{nrtc} ! 881: ! 882: \item IN A SENSE, THIS IS A HYBRID OF THE TWO PREVIOUS APPROACHES, ! 883: INTENDED TO MINIMIZE THE DISADVANTAGES OF EACH ! 884: \begin{nrtc} ! 885: \item SAME APPLICATION PROTOCOL,\\ ! 886: BUT DIFFERENT UNDERYLING LAYERS ! 887: \end{nrtc} ! 888: \end{nrtc} ! 889: \end{bwslide} ! 890: ! 891: ! 892: \begin{bwslide} ! 893: \part* {TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES}\bf ! 894: ! 895: \begin{nrtc} ! 896: \item INTRODUCE A TRANSPORT ENTITY CALLED THE ``TS-BRIDGE'' ! 897: \begin{quote}\em ! 898: ``Users are interested in services, not protocols.''\\ \raggedleft ! 899: -- Marshall Rose, The Open Book (1990) ! 900: \end{quote} ! 901: ! 902: \item THE TS-BRIDGE ``COPIES'' SERVICE PRIMITIVES FROM ONE TS-STACK TO THE ! 903: OTHER, e.g.: ! 904: \begin{nrtc} ! 905: \item UPON RECEIVING A T-CONNECT.INDICATION PRIMITIVE FROM ONE ! 906: TS-STACK, ! 907: ! 908: \item IT ISSUES A T-CONNECT.REQUEST PRIMITIVE TO THE OTHER TS-STACK ! 909: \end{nrtc} ! 910: ! 911: \item AS DISCUSSED EARLIER, THIS TECHNOLOGY IS USED FOR CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN ! 912: DIFFERENT OSI COMMUNITIES ! 913: \end{nrtc} ! 914: \end{bwslide} ! 915: ! 916: ! 917: \begin{bwslide} ! 918: \ctitle {TRANSPORT-SERVICE BRIDGES (cont.)} ! 919: ! 920: \vskip.5in ! 921: \diagram[p]{figureT-9} ! 922: \end{bwslide} ! 923: ! 924: ! 925: \begin{bwslide} ! 926: \ctitle {CONS vs. CLNS CONNECTIVITY} ! 927: ! 928: \vskip.5in ! 929: \diagram[p]{figureT-19} ! 930: \end{bwslide} ! 931: ! 932: ! 933: \begin{bwslide} ! 934: \ctitle {THE TS-BRIDGE AND THE OSI MODEL\\ (REVIEW)} ! 935: ! 936: \begin{nrtc} ! 937: \item THE TS-BRIDGE IS A LEVEL-FOUR ROUTER ! 938: ! 939: \item POTENTIAL PROBLEMS: ! 940: \begin{nrtc} ! 941: \item THE TS-BRIDGE MAINTAINS STATE AS TO THE EXISTING CONNECTIONS ! 942: ! 943: \item TWO CHECKSUMS, AND NEITHER REALLY END-TO-END ! 944: ! 945: \item \underline{MAY} THWART SOPHISTICATED BACK-PRESSURE TECHNIQUES ! 946: \end{nrtc} ! 947: \end{nrtc} ! 948: \end{bwslide} ! 949: ! 950: ! 951: \begin{bwslide} ! 952: \ctitle {AN IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TS-BRIDGE} ! 953: ! 954: \begin{nrtc} ! 955: \item FIRST DEMONSTRATION IN FEBRUARY, 1988 ! 956: \begin{nrtc} ! 957: \item TP4/CLNP to RFC1006/TCP ! 958: \end{nrtc} ! 959: ! 960: \item ANOTHER IMPLEMENTATION IN EUROPE IS HANDLING ! 961: \begin{nrtc} ! 962: \item TP0/X.25 to RFC1006/TCP ! 963: \end{nrtc} ! 964: \end{nrtc} ! 965: \end{bwslide} ! 966: ! 967: ! 968: \begin{bwslide} ! 969: \ctitle {SCORECARD} ! 970: ! 971: \begin{nrtc} ! 972: \item PERFORMANCE: FAIR ! 973: ! 974: \item FLEXIBILITY: HIGH; INDEPENDENT OF ANY APPLICATION ! 975: ! 976: \item TRANSPARENCY: TOTAL ! 977: ! 978: \item AMENABILITY: ! 979: \begin{nrtc} ! 980: \item TCP END-SYSTEMS MUST RUN ``NEW'' PROTOCOLS ! 981: \begin{nrtc} ! 982: \item BUT, NO MODIFICATIONS REQUIRED TO END-SYSTEM KERNELS ! 983: \end{nrtc} ! 984: ! 985: \item MAY INTRODUCE ADMINISTRATIVE PROBLEMS ! 986: \end{nrtc} ! 987: \end{nrtc} ! 988: \end{bwslide} ! 989: ! 990: ! 991: \begin{bwslide} ! 992: \part* {NETWORK TUNNELS}\bf ! 993: ! 994: \begin{nrtc} ! 995: \item IDEA: ENCAPSULATE CLNP INSIDE OF IP, TREATING IP AS SIMPLY A DATA LINK ! 996: PROTOCOL ! 997: \begin{quote}\em ! 998: ``Encapsulation complies with the layering concept, but violates the notion ! 999: of absolute levels.''\\ \raggedleft ! 1000: -- Danny Cohen and Jon Postel, ``The ISO Reference Model and Other Protocol ! 1001: Architectures'' (1983) ! 1002: \end{quote} ! 1003: ! 1004: \item NS-TUNNEL PERFORMS AS A ROUTER, REMOVING ONE DATA LINK HEADER AND ! 1005: ADDING ANOTHER ! 1006: ! 1007: \item METHOD SPECIFIED IN [RFC1070] ! 1008: ! 1009: \item ADDRESS MAPPINGS SPECIFIED IN [RFC1069] ! 1010: \end{nrtc} ! 1011: \end{bwslide} ! 1012: ! 1013: ! 1014: \begin{bwslide} ! 1015: \ctitle {TUNNELING} ! 1016: ! 1017: \vskip.5in ! 1018: \diagram[p]{figureT-18} ! 1019: \end{bwslide} ! 1020: ! 1021: ! 1022: \begin{bwslide} ! 1023: \ctitle {NETWORK TUNNELS} ! 1024: ! 1025: \vskip.5in ! 1026: \diagram[p]{figureT-10} ! 1027: \end{bwslide} ! 1028: ! 1029: ! 1030: \begin{bwslide} ! 1031: \ctitle {INTERESTING FEATURES} ! 1032: ! 1033: \begin{nrtc} ! 1034: \item NO STATE MAINTAINED BY NS-TUNNEL ! 1035: ! 1036: \item A TRUE END-TO-END CHECKSUM ! 1037: \end{nrtc} ! 1038: \end{bwslide} ! 1039: ! 1040: ! 1041: \begin{bwslide} ! 1042: \ctitle {POTENTIAL PROBLEMS} ! 1043: ! 1044: \begin{nrtc} ! 1045: \item REQUIRES COMMON HIGHER-LEVEL PROTOCOLS (TRANSPORT AND ABOVE) ON BOTH ! 1046: END-SYSTEMS, BUT DOES NOT REQUIRE ALL INTERVENING ROUTERS TO USE THE ! 1047: SAME NETWORK PROTOCOL ! 1048: ! 1049: \item THE TCP END-SYSTEM IMPLEMENTATION CHOICES ARE SIMILAR TO NETBIOS OVER ! 1050: TCP [RFC1001/1002] ! 1051: \end{nrtc} ! 1052: \end{bwslide} ! 1053: ! 1054: ! 1055: \begin{bwslide} ! 1056: \ctitle {AN IMPLEMENATION OF AN NS-TUNNEL} ! 1057: ! 1058: \begin{nrtc} ! 1059: \item HAVEN'T SEE ANY YET ! 1060: \begin{nrtc} ! 1061: \item BUT WILL BE IN 4.4BSD UNIX ! 1062: \end{nrtc} ! 1063: ! 1064: \item NEED A LOT OF CLNP-BASED NETWORKS BEFORE THIS IS OF USE ! 1065: ! 1066: \item SO THIS WILL HAPPEN AT THE END OF THE TRANSITION PERIOD ! 1067: \end{nrtc} ! 1068: \end{bwslide} ! 1069: ! 1070: ! 1071: \begin{bwslide} ! 1072: \ctitle {SCORECARD} ! 1073: ! 1074: \begin{nrtc} ! 1075: \item PERFORMANCE: NO WORSE THAN TYPICAL CLNP-ROUTER (AND PROBABLY A LOT ! 1076: BETTER TOO!) ! 1077: ! 1078: \item FLEXIBILITY: HIGH (INDEPENDENT OF ANY APPLICATION) ! 1079: ! 1080: \item TRANSPARENCY: TOTAL ! 1081: ! 1082: \item AMENABILITY: TCP END-SYSTEMS MUST RUN BOTH TRANSPORT PROTOCOLS ! 1083: \end{nrtc} ! 1084: \end{bwslide} ! 1085: ! 1086: ! 1087: \begin{bwslide} ! 1088: \part {EXAMPLES}\bf ! 1089: ! 1090: \begin{nrtc} ! 1091: \item DoD OSI IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ! 1092: ! 1093: \item GENERIC EXAMPLE ! 1094: ! 1095: \item CONCLUSIONS ! 1096: \end{nrtc} ! 1097: \end{bwslide} ! 1098: ! 1099: ! 1100: \begin{bwslide} ! 1101: \part* {DoD OSI\\ IMPLEMENTATION PLAN}\bf ! 1102: ! 1103: \begin{nrtc} ! 1104: \item IMPLEMENT CAPABILITY TO USE OSI IN DoD INTERNETWORK ENVIRONMENT ! 1105: \begin{nrtc} ! 1106: \item OSI-POSIX PROJECT ! 1107: \end{nrtc} ! 1108: ! 1109: \item PROVIDE THE CAPABILITY FOR DoD AND OSI PROTOCOLS TO INTEROPERATE ! 1110: \begin{nrtc} ! 1111: \item FTAM-FTP GATEWAY ! 1112: ! 1113: \item MHS-SMTP GATEWAY ! 1114: \end{nrtc} ! 1115: \end{nrtc} ! 1116: \end{bwslide} ! 1117: ! 1118: ! 1119: \begin{bwslide} ! 1120: \ctitle {OSI-POSIX PROJECT} ! 1121: ! 1122: \begin{nrtc} ! 1123: \item GOAL: ACCELLERATE THE UBIQUITY OF OSI ! 1124: ! 1125: \item APPROACH: OPENLY AVAILABLE, COMPLETE OSI IMPLEMENTATION FOR NEXT MAJOR ! 1126: RELEASE OF BERKELEY \unix/ ! 1127: ! 1128: \item FOR MORE DETAILS: ! 1129: \begin{quote} ! 1130: OSI PROTOCOLS WITHIN AN OPENLY AVAILABLE, POSIX-CONFORMANT, BERKELEY UNIX ! 1131: ENVIRONMENT ! 1132: \end{quote} ! 1133: APPEARING IN ConneXions, OCTOBER, 1988 ! 1134: \end{nrtc} ! 1135: \end{bwslide} ! 1136: ! 1137: ! 1138: \begin{bwslide} ! 1139: \diagram[p]{figureT-15} ! 1140: \end{bwslide} ! 1141: ! 1142: ! 1143: \begin{bwslide} ! 1144: \diagram[p]{figureT-16} ! 1145: \end{bwslide} ! 1146: ! 1147: ! 1148: \begin{bwslide} ! 1149: \part* {GENERIC EXAMPLE}\bf ! 1150: ! 1151: \begin{nrtc} ! 1152: \item TWO PRONGS: ! 1153: \begin{nrtc} ! 1154: \item FAVOR USE OF OSI APPLICATIONS OVER TCP ON LAN MESH ! 1155: ! 1156: \item LOCATE APPLICATION GATEWAYS AND A TS-BRIDGE ON ALL NODES ! 1157: WITH WAN ATTACHMENETS ! 1158: \end{nrtc} ! 1159: ! 1160: \item AWAIT OSI LOWER-LAYERS TO BECOME COMPETITIVE ! 1161: \end{nrtc} ! 1162: \end{bwslide} ! 1163: ! 1164: ! 1165: \begin{bwslide} ! 1166: \ctitle {GENERIC EXAMPLE (cont.)} ! 1167: ! 1168: \begin{nrtc} ! 1169: \item EACH ATTACHMENT LOCUS SHOULD SUPPORT COEXISTENCE SERVICES ! 1170: ! 1171: \item IF RESOURCES PERMIT, SELECT ONE OTHER SYSTEM TO SUPPORT THESE ! 1172: SERVICES FOR USE BY LOCAL UNI-STACK HOSTS ! 1173: ! 1174: \item THIS ``COVERS ALL BASES'' BY HANDLING ALL POSSIBLE OSI COMBINATIONS ! 1175: WITH A BIT OF EXTRA REDUNDANCY ! 1176: ! 1177: \item MIGHT REQUIRE A BIT OF SOPHISTICATED USE FROM THE DIRECTORY ! 1178: \end{nrtc} ! 1179: \end{bwslide} ! 1180: ! 1181: ! 1182: \begin{bwslide} ! 1183: \ctitle {A LAN OF MANY COLORS} ! 1184: ! 1185: \vskip.5in ! 1186: \diagram[p]{figureT-17} ! 1187: \end{bwslide} ! 1188: ! 1189: ! 1190: \begin{bwslide} ! 1191: \part* {CONCLUSIONS}\bf ! 1192: ! 1193: \begin{quote}\em ! 1194: ``Optimality differs according to context.''\\ \raggedleft ! 1195: -- Michael Padlipsky, The Elements of Networking Style (1985) ! 1196: \end{quote} ! 1197: \end{bwslide} ! 1198: ! 1199: ! 1200: \begin{bwslide} ! 1201: \ctitle {CONCLUSIONS (cont.)} ! 1202: ! 1203: \begin{nrtc} ! 1204: \item TCP/IP-BASED NETWORKS WILL OFFER OSI APPLICATIONS ! 1205: ! 1206: \item COEXISTENCE IN THE SHORT TERM: ! 1207: \begin{nrtc} ! 1208: \item TS-BRIDGE MINIMIZES SOFTWARE INVESTMENT ! 1209: \end{nrtc} ! 1210: ! 1211: \item COEXISTENCE IN THE LONG TERM: ! 1212: \begin{nrtc} ! 1213: \item NS-TUNNEL MAXIMIZES PERFORMANCE AND ROBUSTNESS ! 1214: \end{nrtc} ! 1215: ! 1216: \item IF/WHEN THERE ARE NO MORE TCP/IP-BASED NETWORKS, THEN THE ! 1217: COEXISTENCE PERIOD IS OVER, AND TRANSITION IS A NON-ISSUE! ! 1218: \end{nrtc} ! 1219: \end{bwslide}
This archive runs on limited infrastructure. Preserving old code on modern bandwidth. Automated agents are requested to crawl responsibly.