[e2e] new network architecture idea -

[Christian Tschudin]

On Mon, 22 May 2006, Jonathan M. Smith wrote:

> Jon:
> 	Isn't this architectural scheme similar in spirit to the Linda
> distributed system of Gelernter and colleagues?
> 								-JMS

Hi Jonathan,

it could well be that running Linda over a swarm is easy
because of "architectural similarity", however there remains
a considerable crevice between Linda's global + reliable
+ persistent tuple space and IP on swarms.
SUperficially, both do "filtering", but I think that
the transient and best effort characteristics of IPoS
is the most interesting part, which you both loose
when going to Linda.

best, ct.

---
Christian Tschudin, University of Basel       http://cn.cs.unibas.ch/
Computer Science Dept, Bernoullistr. 16, CH - 4056 Basel, Switzerland


>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Jonathan M. Smith
> Olga and Alberico Pompa Professor of Engineering and Applied Science
> Professor of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania
> Levine Hall, 3330 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104
>
> On Sun, 21 May 2006, Jon Crowcroft wrote:
>
> > pub/sub in the original implementation by tibco et al mapped straight onto multicast
> > AND had its own transport (PGM) which was a neat architecture
> >
> > BUT i am not talking about simply pub-/sub - that was for illustration reasons...
> >
> > at the end of th day, the receiver has some stuff they are interstd in - you buy
> > newspaer x, or you tune to tv or radio station y/z OR you subscribe to some
> > belief....all of this is *AND should be* receiver interst based, not sender based
> >
> > even email (I'm not interested in most the spam i get  - this is an indication of a major architectual error
> > that the cost of an activity for a pasrticipant doesnt match the need -
> > and the resource expended isnt paid for by the right party)
> >
> > packet swarming is a simple idea - you need to buy into some complete changes of
> > ways of building net s (you dont send to an address - you percolate traffic to a repository
> > cloud which intersted parties may pick packets out of  - this works even for 1-1 commnication
> > (if you send an email to e2e but cc: me, i might see it as i probably "subscribe" to messages
> > with some field about me - hey, i am sufficiently egomaniacal to want to see stuff like that:)
> >
> > the technoligy exiwts now to do this at a packet level, not just an application level
> >
> > In missive <D5775030-CA8B-4329-A7EC-BFC1A56DD3D4 at cisco.com>, Fred Baker typed:
> >
> >  >>
> >  >>On May 20, 2006, at 4:17 PM, Fergie wrote:
> >  >>
> >  >>> pub/sub how, exactly?
> >  >>
> >  >>I think of pub/sub as an application concept:  I have content I am
> >  >>willing to share, and someone else tells me that they are interested.
> >  >>In this context, I should think the receiving node would tell the
> >  >>sending node that it was interested if the other guy wanted to talk.
> >  >>
> >  >>So now I wonder how this works. I walk into a meeting room and open
> >  >>my laptop. It joins a wireless network, and voila! the peers and
> >  >>servers I am interested in all tell me that they are publishing
> >  >>something to which I might subscribe?
> >  >>
> >  >>I think this is going to require some work to describe. At the end of
> >  >>the day, it is never the receiver that knows there is content out
> >  >>there to receive; it is always the one who sends it who has that
> >  >>knowledge.
> >
> >  cheers
> >
> >    jon
> >
>