⭐ 欢迎来到虫虫下载站! | 📦 资源下载 📁 资源专辑 ℹ️ 关于我们
⭐ 虫虫下载站

📄 rfc60.txt

📁 RFC技术文档 从0000-05
💻 TXT
📖 第 1 页 / 共 2 页
字号:
Network Working Group                                           R. KalinRequest for Comments: 60                                             MITCategory: Experimental                                      13 July 1970                       A Simplified NCP ProtocolStatus of this Memo   This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet   community. This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any   kind. Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested.   Distribution of this memo is unlimited.Abstract   This RFC defines a new NCP protocol that is simple enough to be   implemented on a very small computer, yet can be extended for   efficient operation on large timesharing machines. Because worst case   storage requirements can be predicted, a conservative implementation   can be freed of complicated resource allocation and storage control   procedures. A general error recovery procedure is also defined.Overview and Rational   The central premise of this proposal is an insistence that all user-   to-user connections be bi-directional. For those familiar with   communication theory, this appears most reasonable. All communication   requires a cyclical flow of information. To deny a simple association   between a message and its reply makes protocol unnecessarily   complicated and turns simple mechanisms of flow control into   nightmares.   It is proposed that a bi-directional connection, or duplex link, be   identified by a pair of socket numbers, one for each end. This is   half the number presently required. Associated with the connection   are some number of "crates" or message containers. These crates   travel back and forth over the link carrying network messages from   one side to the other. Buffers are allocated at each end of the link   to hold crates and the messages that they carry. Worst case buffer   requirements are equal to the number of crates in circulation, or the   "capacity" of the link.Details   A message buffer has four states which follow one another cyclically.   They are:Kalin                                                           [Page 1]RFC 60                 A Simplified NCP Protocol            13 July 1970   1) empty,   2) filled with a message-laden crate to be unloaded,   3) filled with an empty crate, and   4) filled with a message-laden crate to be sent.   Normally state transitions correspond to message arrival, message   removal, message insertion and message transmission.   For a process to be an NCP it must:   1) be able to make initial contact with foreign hosts via the control   link and, if necessary, delete user-to-user links left over from the   previous system incarnation.   2) be able to create user-to-user links.   3) be able to interface users with these links.   4) be able to delete user-to-user links.   The first of the four functions shall not be discussed here except to   point out that it contains critical races that can not be resolved   without making assumptions about maximum message propagation delays.   Since within the ARPA network, bounds on message turnaround time do   not exist, the approach chosen must necessarily be tender. The other   three functions are discussed first from the viewpoint of one   interested in implementing a minimal NCP. Then extensions and   improvements are proposed that are suitable for larger machines.   Any NCP must be capable of creating a duplex link between a local   user process and a remote one. The current protocol accomplishes this   by queuing a potentially unbounded number of RFC's and waiting for   the user to examine the queue to determine with whom he wishes to   talk. There is no guarantee that the user will ever look at the queue   and there is no way to limit the size of the queue. The overflow   error message suggested fails in the respect because it admits that   the RFC will only be sent again. The picture need not be this bleak.   The following network conversation demonstrates how connections can   be made without using queues or relying on user process attention.   Suppose that a local user process and a remote user process wish to   establish a new connection. The remote process asks its NCP to listen   for a connection request and gives it the socket identifier for its   end. Optionally it can give both socket identifiers. The user process   at the local end asks its NCP to send a request for a duplex linkKalin                                                           [Page 2]RFC 60                 A Simplified NCP Protocol            13 July 1970   (RFDL). It specifies both socket identifiers of the proposed link.   The local NCP sends a RFDL over the control link with the following   format:   RFDL <my socket> <your socket> <max number buffers> <spare>   The third argument is normally supplied by the local NCP and   indicates the maximum number of buffers the NCP will consider   allocating to this duplex link. If buffers are in user storage the   count may be given by the user in a call made to the NCP.   The RFDL is received at the remote host and the remote NCP compares   <my socket> and <your socket> against the socket identifiers supplied   by unmatched listens issued to it. For listens in which just a single   identifier was given only <your socket> must match. If both socket   identifiers were given, they both must match. If a match is found an   acknowledgement message with the following format is sent back by the   NCP:   ACDL <your socket> <my socket> <number buffers> <spare>   The <number buffers> parameter is equal to the smaller of <max number   buffers> as specified in the RFDL and the number of message buffers   agreeable to the remote NCP. If no match is found the error message   returned is an ACDL in which <number buffers> equals zero. Note that   the RFDL mechanism is similar to a RFC mechanism in which the bound   on queue size is one and connection acceptance is done entirely by   the NCP.   The two varieties of a listen correspond to two modes of channel   operation. The single parameter variety, as typified by a LOGIN   process, is to be used by programs that will "talk with anyone who   happens to dial their number". Screening of contacts for   appropriateness is left to the user process. The double parameter   listen is used by user programs who know with whom they will   communicate and do not wish to be bothered by random RFDL's from   other sources. Given the way in which socket name space is   partitioned, it is impossible to get a matching RFDL from any process   but the one intended.   Message buffers for the connection are allocated in the remote host   before it sends the ACDL and in the local host at the time the ACDL   is received. The number of buffers at each end is equal to the   <number buffers> parameter in the ACDL. The state of all remote   buffers is "empty" and of all local buffers "filled with empty   crate". After buffers are allocated the local user process is   notified that it is able to start sending messages.Kalin                                                           [Page 3]RFC 60                 A Simplified NCP Protocol            13 July 1970   The type of interface presented by the NCP between the user process   and the newly created duplex link is a decision local to that host. A   simple but complete interface would provide two calls to be made to   the NCP. GETMESSAGE would return the next message from the link   complete with marking, text and padding. PUTMESSAGE would take a   message, marking and text only, and buffer it for transmission. The   obvious logical errors would be reported.   We suggest that message alignment be left to the user. On most   machines it is a simple but time consuming operation. If done in the   NCP there is no guarantee that the user will not have to readjust it   himself. It is usually not possible to know a priori whether the text   portion should be right adjusted to a word boundary, left adjusted to   a word boundary, aligned to the end of the last message, or   fragmented in some exotic way.   Within this protocol message boundaries are used to provide storage   allocation information. If not required by the user this information   can be forgotten and the user interface can be made to appear as a   bit stream. Though welcomed by purists, such a strategy may produce   complications when attempting to synchronize both ends of a link.   Links are deleted by removing empty crates from them and reclaiming   the buffers allocated to the crates removed. Only buffers with crates   in can be reclaimed; empty buffers must remain available to receive   messages that may arrive. When no crates are left, no buffers remain,   and the socket identifiers can be forgotten. When empty crates are   removed, a decrement size message is sent to the foreign NCP to allow   it to reduce its buffer allocation:   DEC <my socket> <your socket> <number of buffers dropped>   A reply is solicited from the foreign NCP to affirm the deletions or   to complain of an error. Possible errors include "no such link" and   "impossible number of buffers dropped".   The option to close a link can be given to a user process by   providing either of two system calls. NOMOREOUTPUT declares that no   more messages will be sent by the local user process. All local   buffers for the link that contain empty crates are reclaimed by the   NCP. DEC messages are sent to the foreign NCP. As crates are emptied,   via GETMESSAGE calls, their buffers are reclaimed too. As an   alternative, the call KILLMESSAGE can be implemented. This call can   be used in place of a PUTMESSAGE. Instead of filling an empty crate   with a message to be sent, KILLMESSAGE will cause the crate to be   reclaimed and a DEC control message sent.   In situations where the user process has died, or for some otherKalin                                                           [Page 4]

⌨️ 快捷键说明

复制代码 Ctrl + C
搜索代码 Ctrl + F
全屏模式 F11
切换主题 Ctrl + Shift + D
显示快捷键 ?
增大字号 Ctrl + =
减小字号 Ctrl + -