Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!UDEL.EDU!Mills
From: Mills@UDEL.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re:  A couple of simple questions.
Message-ID: <8711212315.aa14738@Huey.UDEL.EDU>
Date: Sat, 21-Nov-87 23:15:52 EST
Article-I.D.: Huey.8711212315.aa14738
Posted: Sat Nov 21 23:15:52 1987
Date-Received: Mon, 23-Nov-87 07:19:20 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 17

Guru,

Yes, ARPANET is now and has been a connection-oriented network, but with
dynamics and route-binding mechanisms usually friendly to frisky datagram
service. Sometimes, like in the recent case of an X.25 access problem
which resulted in destructive virtual-circuit thrashing, the more liberal
of us buzzards may grumble a bit or two, but not because virtual circuits,
route binding or flow mechanisms are inherently bad. Sometimes, however,
the choice of resource allocation and binding strategies in ARPANET (and
public packet nets) suggest the designers had in mind a few number
of large flows between hosts attached to the network, rather than a large
number of small flows between gateways, which seems to be what the ARPANET
is evolving to.

Andy Malis described the new End-End Protocol in RFC-979.

Dave