[e2e] Layering vs. modularization

[David P. Reed]

Encasulation means that the "totally ordered stack of layers" suddenly 
can grow to infinite depth, as the sequence of layers is laid on top of 
a subsequence selected from the same layers.

Layering has nothing to do with "looking inside the packets".  That 
concept is not layering, it is something quite different - having to do 
with lack of "interpretation" of bit strings.

George Michaelson wrote:
>
> On 16/05/2008, at 8:20 AM, David P. Reed wrote:
>>
>> b) Explain protocol encapsulation  (sending IPv6 datagrams within UDP 
>> VPN packets over a TCP based overlay network implemented in userspace 
>> stacks on machines that offload part of the VPN implementation to a 
>> peer within a bluetooth subnet) as a form of layering?   It seems to 
>> me that encapsulation is akin to allowing recursion in one's 
>> language.   Languages that allow recursion are unlike FORTRAN 77, 
>> which is "layered".
>
> recursion requires that first-class data constructs in the language be 
> respected, so stack frame boundaries, globals etc are meaningful.
>
> encapsulation doesn't require this. the encapsulated protocol has its 
> own e2e significance and its own routing. for the purposes of 
> encapsulation, its just data.
>
> therefore the comparison (as in most analogies?) for me, is not a good 
> fit. actually, I  think most things described as recursive usually 
> aren't.
>
> stateful packet inspectors *might* need a re-write, but that aside, I 
> don't see  how anything other than a bug would make the outer V6 
> active units need to read the inner V4 payload, or vice versa
>
> -G
>