ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Weekly posting summary for ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org

2012-01-06 07:29:05
Yes, "association" was an application level term in OSI.

This was because the wire stringers, i.e. PTT types, had forced a definition of "connection" that was wrong. In OSI, a "connection" was between the (N+1)-entities (protocol machines). Not the (N)-entities as it should be. TCP gets this wrong as well, where connections are between port-ids that are at the layer boundary. (Connection here is used to be interchangeable with flow. Not intended to imply only those protocols with feedback mechanisms.)

This error leads to all sorts of problems, which are avoided by delta-t which decouples port allocation and synchronization.

The convention of the use of port-ids is to create a "connection-id," i.e. to distinguish multiple flows between the same two addresses. Early on there was considerable experimentation with how to do this. Some protocols would have a "connection-id" field and one end would number from one end of the field and the other end from the other end. That of course had problems. Since port-ids were locally unique, the idea was hit upon that concatenating them would be a simpler way to do it.

The kludge of using them for application names came later.

It turns out the port-id concept is crucial to getting layer boundaries right.

This discussion has only touched the tip of the iceberg on the analogy of protocol and program. There is the Protocol as Program in the large, i.e. across all systems, e.g. the TCP spec laid out in the RFC. There is the protocol in a system in a layer (one might have multiple of these for different security domains or some such).and there are then multiple instances of that for each flow/connection.

As to what is a protocol, someone already hit pretty close. a set of rules and formats (semantic and syntatic) which determines the communication behavior of a state machine. It has been amusing how often some think that merely writing down the format of the messages is a protocol specification.

Take care,
John




At 0:53 -0500 2012/01/06, Thomas Narten wrote:
Total of 59 messages in the last 7 days.

script run at: Fri Jan  6 00:53:02 EST 2012

    Messages   |      Bytes        | Who
--------+------+--------+----------+------------------------
 11.86% |    7 | 12.60% |    57079 | evnikita2(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
  8.47% |    5 |  8.91% |    40337 | john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com
  8.47% |    5 |  7.46% |    33795 | derhoermi(_at_)gmx(_dot_)net
  8.47% |    5 |  6.79% |    30739 | dhc(_at_)dcrocker(_dot_)net
  6.78% |    4 |  6.67% |    30218 | tlr(_at_)w3(_dot_)org
  3.39% |    2 |  6.98% |    31588 | eburger(_at_)standardstrack(_dot_)com
  3.39% |    2 |  3.08% |    13944 | julian(_dot_)reschke(_at_)gmx(_dot_)de
  3.39% |    2 |  2.95% |    13375 | dave(_at_)cridland(_dot_)net
  3.39% |    2 |  2.83% |    12836 | john(_at_)jck(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  3.24% |    14685 | 
ron(_dot_)even(_dot_)tlv(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  2.65% |    11995 | david(_dot_)black(_at_)emc(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  2.42% |    10981 | pthubert(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  2.30% |    10413 | cyrus(_at_)daboo(_dot_)name
  1.69% |    1 |  2.00% |     9065 | bob(_dot_)hinden(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.98% |     8972 | kathleen(_dot_)moriarty(_at_)emc(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.92% |     8676 | mstjohns(_at_)comcast(_dot_)net
  1.69% |    1 |  1.67% |     7580 | tnadeau(_at_)lucidvision(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.65% |     7474 | wesley(_dot_)george(_at_)twcable(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.55% |     7001 | d3e3e3(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.54% |     6984 | tglassey(_at_)earthlink(_dot_)net
  1.69% |    1 |  1.50% |     6770 | 
brian(_dot_)e(_dot_)carpenter(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.46% |     6629 | narten(_at_)us(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.44% |     6522 | stpeter(_at_)stpeter(_dot_)im
  1.69% |    1 |  1.44% |     6502 | jmh(_at_)joelhalpern(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.41% |     6390 | ole(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.41% |     6365 | dotis(_at_)mail-abuse(_dot_)org
  1.69% |    1 |  1.41% |     6364 | yaakov_s(_at_)rad(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.35% |     6118 | eosborne(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.35% |     6105 | andy(_at_)netconfcentral(_dot_)org
  1.69% |    1 |  1.31% |     5944 | fernando(_at_)gont(_dot_)com(_dot_)ar
  1.69% |    1 |  1.29% |     5848 | kaushalshriyan(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com
  1.69% |    1 |  1.21% |     5495 | adrian(_at_)olddog(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk
  1.69% |    1 |  1.18% |     5356 | paul(_dot_)hoffman(_at_)vpnc(_dot_)org
  1.69% |    1 |  1.03% |     4685 | randy(_at_)psg(_dot_)com
--------+------+--------+----------+------------------------
100.00% |   59 |100.00% |   452830 | Total

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf