Re: Q: protocolls and fault tolerance
Andreas Brusinsky (brusinsk@ibdr.inf.tu-dresden.de)
Fri, 30 May 1997 14:46:59 +0200 (MET DST)
On Thu, 29 May 1997 touch@ISI.EDU wrote:
> We did some analysis of HTTP on T/TCP, ARDP, and a few other
> base protocols. It was analysis-level only, though.
So is there up to now only a HTTP based on TCP ?
Is there a reference to a paper or something discussing the mentionend
analysis?
> HTTP over ATM doesn't make much sense, per se, because:
But aren't backbones rely on ATM to be fast enougth?
Bandwith reservation could take place on na ATM network, which
is - I believe - not possible with IP up to now.
And as far as I know there are no really good IP on ATM realisations.
>
> HTTP uses URLs,
> URLs use DNS,
> DNS is an name->IPnumber mapping
But URLs or DNS names could be mapped to something else - another protocoll
would probably have also a kind of addressing framework.
>
> PS - what's the win if straight on ATM? More expensive end equipment?
Hopefully ATM hardware will become less expensive in future. It
is probably overpriced nowdays anyway.
>
> Joe
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Joe Touch - touch@isi.edu http://www.isi.edu/~touch/
> ISI / Project Leader, ATOMIC-2, LSAM http://www.isi.edu/atomic2/
> USC / Research Assistant Prof. http://www.isi.edu/lsam/
>