[e2e] architecturally speaking

[Jon Crowcroft]

In missive <200303282047.h2SKlTSs023198 at dwight.CS.Berkeley.EDU>, Kevin Fall typ
ed:

 >>to what sort of environments it is targeted for and the justification for
 >>some of the decision(s).  In particular:
 
 >>	.. this paper concentrates on naming and addressing issues for
 >>	establishing connectivity between radically heterogeneous networks,
 >>	a problem that the Internet Protocol only partially solved.  In this paper,
 >>	we are literally concerned only with 'inter-networking,' and not with any
 >>	of the many other networking issues such as the units, timeliness or
 >>	guarantee of resource allocation, security or auditing.  A concrete
 >>	realization of our framework must address these issues, but within the contexts
 >>	of the particular networks being connected:  we do not believe it is
 >>	sensible to address them through a single unifying overlay network protocol.


gosh - thats a quick read - we spent a while reading the dtnrg stuff -
i suggest people read before writing:-)

plutarch is not about naming and addressing much - if you want a good
solutuon to that problem i would refer you to paul francis work
(either his thesis or more recent work or both) - it is more about
what it says so please read it:-)

the DTNRG stuff , which we read is about disconnection.

 >>Given that DTNRG is somehow focused precisely on an overlay network protocol
 >>approach (but with a particular service definition of non-interactive delivery in the
 >>worst cases), I'm particularly interested in why this is apparently rejected by the
 >>authors.  Further, in environments where long periods of disconnection and/or high
 >>delays may be encountered, my hunch is that some of the mechanisms suggested
 >>for supporting dynamic mappings within contexts (using soft-state, using some form of
 >>request/response name binding) might be difficult.
 >>

overlays are very f ine - overlays for disconnection have to do state
(context) management very well - we skate aroud that coz we only need
to do it "on the order" of as well as the internet or so...


good luck - your parsec-age may vary...

btwe,m i really like the DTNRG stuff , but it is orthogonal
 >>
 >>>
 >>> From:  Lloyd Wood <l.wood at eim.surrey.ac.uk>
 >>> To:    Jon Crowcroft <Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk>
 >>> cc:    end2end-interest at postel.org
 >>> Subject: Re: [e2e] architecturally speaking
 >>> Date:  Thu, 27 Mar 2003 19:18:32 GMT
 >>>
 >>> On Wed, 2003-03-26 at 15:09, Jon Crowcroft wrote:
 >>> > fyi, we just sent this you know where -
 >>> 
 >>> where? Are we supposed to read minds, or what?
 >>> lamentably out-of-date/incomplete list on:
 >>> http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/%7Ejac22/out/
 >>> no help. Still, at least the paper's online. Asking for accurate
 >>> metadata/context as well possibly too much, really; fortunately,
 >>> academics have journals simply to organise their output meaningfully.
 >>> 
 >>> > http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~jac22/out/plutarch.pdf
 >>> 
 >>> Plutarch: An Argument for Network Pluralism
 >>> Jon Crowcroft, Steven Hand, Richard Mortier, Timothy Roscoe, Andrew
 >>> Warfield, 24 March 2003.
 >>> 
 >>> Hmmm, heterogenity, late-binding of names and contexts; a very similar
 >>> approach to the Interplanetary Internet 'bundle' idea...
 >>> 
 >>> ..which is currently being expressed in some recently-submitted
 >>> delay-tolerant networking drafts:
 >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-dtnrg-arch-00.txt
 >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-dtnrg-ipn-bundle-xfer-00.txt
 >>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-irtf-dtnrg-bundle-spec-00.txt
 >>
 >>> 
 >>> Bundling protocol software shortly available from:
 >>> http://www.dtnrg.org/
 >>> and very possibly by this weekend.
 >>> 
 >>> L.
 >>> 
 >>> <http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/><L.Wood at ee.surrey.ac.uk>
 >>> 

 cheers

   jon