FYI:


At 10/5/01  02:37 AM, David Farber wrote:
>>http://www.ana.lcs.mit.edu/anaweb/PDF/Rethinking_2001.pdf
>>
>>"Rethinking the design of the Internet:
>>The end to end arguments vs. the brave new world"
>>
>>Marjory S. Blumenthal Computer Science & Telecommunications Board, NRC
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>David D. Clark M.I.T. Lab for Computer Science [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>A version of this paper to appear in the ACM Transactions on Internet
>>Technology
>>A version also to appear in Communications Policy in Transition: The
>>Internet and Beyond,
>>edited by Benjamin Compaine and Shane Greenstein, MIT Press, Sept. 2001
>>
>>Abstract
>>
>>This paper looks at the Internet and the changing set of requirements
>>for the Internet that are emerging as it becomes more commercial, more
>>oriented towards the consumer, and used for a wider set of purposes. We
>>discuss a set of principles that have guided the design of the Internet,
>>called the end to end arguments, and we conclude that there is a risk
>>that the range of new requirements now emerging could have the
>>consequence of compromising the Internet's original design principles.
>>Were this to happen, the Internet might lose some of its key features,
>>in particular its ability to support new and unanticipated applications.
>>We link this possible outcome to a number of trends: the rise of new
>>stakeholders in the Internet, in particular Internet Service Providers;
>>new government interests; the changing motivations of the growing user
>>base; and the tension between the demand for trustworthy overall
>>operation and the inability to trust the behavior of individual users.
>>
>>Introduction
>>
>>The end to end arguments are a set of design principles that
>>characterize (among other things) how the Internet has been designed.
>>These principles were first articulated in the early 1980s, and they
>>have served as an architectural model in countless design debates for
>>almost 20 years.
>>
>>The end to end arguments concern how application requirements should be
>>met in a system. When a general purpose system (for example, a network
>>or an operating system) is built, and specific applications are then
>>built using this system (for example, e-mail or the World Wide Web over
>>the Internet), there is a question of how these specific applications
>>and their required supporting services should be designed. The end to
>>end arguments suggest that specific application-level functions usually
>>cannot, and preferably should not, be built into the lower levels of the
>>system-the core of the network. The reason why was stated as follows in
>>the original paper:
>>
>>"The function in question can completely and correctly be implemented
>>only with the knowledge and help of the application standing at the
>>endpoints of the communications system. Therefore, providing that
>>questioned function as a feature of the communications systems itself is
>>not possible."
>>
>>In the original paper, the primary example of this end to end reasoning
>>about application functions is the assurance of accurate and reliable
>>transfer of information across the network. Even if any one lower level
>>subsystem, such as a network, tries hard to ensure reliability, data can
>>be lost or corrupted after it leaves that subsystem. The ultimate check
>>of correct execution has to be at the application level, at the
>>endpoints of the transfer. There are many examples of this observation
>>in practice.
>>
>>Even if parts of an application-level function can potentially be
>>implemented in the core of the network, the end to end arguments state
>>that one should resist this approach if possible. There are a number of
>>advantages of moving application-specific functions up out of the core
>>of the network and providing only general-purpose system services there.
>>
>>o The complexity of the core network is reduced, which reduces costs and
>>facilitates future upgrades to the network.
>>
>>o Generality in the network increases the chances that a new application
>>can be added without having to change the core of the network.
>>
>>o Applications do not have to depend on the successful implementation
>>and operation of application-specific services in the network, which may
>>increase their reliability.
>>
>>Of course, the end to end arguments are not offered as an absolute.
>>There are functions that can only be implemented in the core of the
>>network, and issues of efficiency and performance may motivate
>>core-located features. Features that enhance popular applications can be
>>added to the core of the network in such a way that they do not prevent
>>other applications from functioning. But the bias toward movement of
>>function "up" from the core and "out" to the edge node has served very
>>well as a central Internet design principle.
>>
>>As a consequence of the end to end arguments, the Internet has evolved
>>to have certain characteristics. The functions implemented "in" the
>>Internet-by the routers that forward packets-have remained rather simple
>>and general. The bulk of the functions that implement specific
>>applications, such as e-mail, the World Wide Web, multi-player games,
>>and so on, have been implemented in software on the computers attached
>>to the "edge" of the Net. The edge-orientation for applications and
>>comparative simplicity within the Internet together have facilitated the
>>creation of new applications, and they are part of the context for
>>innovation on the Internet.
>>
>>Moving away from end to end
>>
>>For its first 20 years, much of the Internet's design has been shaped by
>>the end to end arguments. To a large extent, the core of the network
>>provides a very general data transfer service, which is used by all the
>>different applications running over it. The individual applications have
>>been designed in different ways, but mostly in ways that are sensitive
>>to the advantages of the end to end design approach. However, over the
>>last few years, a number of new requirements have emerged for the
>>Internet and its applications. To certain stakeholders, these various
>>new requirements might best be met through the addition of new mechanism
>>in the core of the network. This perspective has, in turn, raised
>>concerns among those who wish to preserve the benefits of the original
>>Internet design.
>>
>>Continued at:
>>
>>http://www.ana.lcs.mit.edu/anaweb/PDF/Rethinking_2001.pdf
>
>For archives see: http://www.interesting-people.org/


+++

Jay Fenello, Internet Coaching
http://www.Fenello.com ... 678-585-9765
http://www.YourWebPartner.com ... Web Support
http://www.AligningWithPurpose.com ... for a Better World
-----------------------------------------------------------
"A new civilization is emerging in our lives, and blind men
every�where are trying to suppress it."  -- Alvin Toffler


Reply via email to