Talk:Communication protocol: Difference between revisions
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Communications protocol/Archive 1) (bot |
m Cherdchai Iamwongsrikul moved page Talk:Communications protocol to Talk:Communication protocol |
(No difference)
|
Revision as of 11:02, 2 December 2017
Computing: Networking C‑class High‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Internetwork protocol page were merged into Communication protocol on 2016-09-17. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see Error: Invalid time. its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Merge outcome
Material merged into this article in this edit came from the article Network protocol design principles, now a redirect.
Questionable passages removed from earlier draft, and comments:
An interesting fact is that the poor design of the error-correction protocol stack of the Internet forces a requirement for error-rates of 1x10-11. This is often achieved by tunneling the the internet protocols through a more reliable protocol such as ATM (asynchronous transfer mode).
- This is not true. TCP will work reasonably well up to about 1x10-7, with slight degradation (0.12% packet loss on 12000 bit packets). In any case, it's fibre, not ATM, that is reliable. ATM has no EDC layer at all (unless you count cell header checksums)
The packets each have a checksum, the sum of all the 8-bit bytes in the packet.
- No it's not: it's 16-bit one's complement checksum of the contents and a pseudo-IP-header: see http://www.networksorcery.com/enp/protocol/tcp.htm for details
In the internet, ICMP "pings" are sent by routers every 30 seconds or so. In the internet, when a ping fails, the router updates its routing table.
- No, they're not pings: they're routing update messages.
-- The Anome
Thanks for the corrections. I think I need to qualify the remarks about the packet error rate. If an error rate above 1x10-11 is also coupled to a delay of three hundred milliseconds or more (i.e. a satellite link), I've heard reports that a packet storm of rebroadcast packets can occur, paralyzing the failing link until routers begin to avoid the congestion. A number of experimental and optionally-deployed protocols use more-selective packet retransmission to avoid this problem, which is a known defect in TCP caused by its windowed packet retransmission policy. Ray Van De Walker
See http://www.psc.edu/networking/tcp_friendly.html#performance
and specifically the paper http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/mathis97macroscopic.html
for
- a theoretical derivation of TCP performance vs. error + delay * mathematical modelling ditto
- actual measurements to back up the above.
This seems to suggest that error-limited performance is very roughly
bandwidth = (sqrt(mss) * C) / (rtt * sqrt(ber))
where the units are:
- mss = max segment size in bits
- C = dimensionless constant, approx 0.9 (see paper for more details)
- rtt = round trip time in seconds
- ber = bit error rate in per-bit
Note that this is a small-ber approximation, assuming loss is dominated by full-length packets.
Needless to say, the bandwidth does not go to infinity if the ber goes to zero: packet drops will occur when the b/w tries to exceed the physical link b/w.
This model appears to fit reality pretty well, according to the paper.
-- The Anome
Other things that might usefully be discussed
- stream vs message protocols
- out-of-order replies
- pipelining
- error recovery
- marking boundaries (count at start vs special character)
- out-of-band mechanisms (e.g. closing TCP connection to indicate end, FTP using new connections for file contents)
-- MartinPool
The articles should not be merged because then the article (combination of network and computing protocol) will be much to large.
Xunex
protocol vs language
despite the comer reference i think there is an important distinction to be made between protocols and languages. protocols are usually restricted to a specific set of predefined messages whereas languages can communicate origninal content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.116.92.84 (talk) 12:09, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Communications protocol. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091227210642/http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/video.php?courseId=1005&p=3 to http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/video.php?courseId=1005&p=3
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040610001039/http://javvin.com/protocolsuite.html to http://www.javvin.com/protocolsuite.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:32, 11 August 2017 (UTC)