Subject: [NSIS] framework: proposal on reliability

From: "Hancock, Robert" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2003 23:25:08 +0100

dear all,

we've had multiple inconclusive discussions on reliability
requirements for the NTLP in the recent and distant past.

i've tried to summarise them and provide some additional
factoids for consideration in an i-d. while the i-d editor
processes it, you can find it at
http://sigcomp.srmr.co.uk/~reh/draft-hancock-nsis-reliability-00.txt

my conclusions from all this are:

                             ...it is appropriate for the NTLP 
   to provide a reliable message delivery service, which would be 
   optional for signaling applications to use. The role of such a 
   service would be limited to ensuring rapid delivery of messages to 
   the nodes where they are to be processed in signaling applications, 
   and not to provide any application-layer state synchronization 
   service or hard-state support. Such a reliability service should if 
   possible be implemented in a way which can be transparent to 
   intermediate NSIS nodes which don't take part in the signaling 
   application; it will probably require congestion control in the NTLP 
   as a consequence. 

If you disagree with this conclusion, take a look at the draft and 
tell me why. Apart from congestion control (a closely related subject),
I regard this as the single major outstanding technical issue with the
framework, and would like to see how we can finish off that discussion
during August and early September (if that's possible).

cheers,

robert h.

No doubt, people will complain that this draft is too long (there's
about 14 pages of argument + a pile of references). On the other
hand, people have also complained that the argument about reliability
has not really been made (despite > 200 emails on the subject), and
have also asked for 'details not handwaving'. Well, here goes.

_______________________________________________
nsis mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nsis