Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!rochester!cornell!mak
From: mak@urd.cs.cornell.edu (Mesaac Makpangou)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.isis
Subject: Re: A technical question
Keywords: Bypass protocols
Message-ID: <35564@cornell.UUCP>
Date: 29 Dec 89 16:31:16 GMT
References: <35521@cornell.UUCP>
Sender: nobody@cornell.UUCP
Reply-To: mak@cs.cornell.edu (Mesaac Makpangou)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY
Lines: 20

In article <35521@cornell.UUCP> ken@cs.cornell.edu (Ken Birman) writes:
> ....
>
>It is so attractive to me to switch to BY-ABCAST (WOW!  What speed!)
>that I am inclined to change the promises ISIS makes about ABCAST
>addressing to say that "Two messages sent to the same logical addresses
>will be delivered in the same order; messages to different addresses
>may be delivered in different orders even if some destination processes
>receive both".  How do people feel about this idea? Recall that "bcast"
>is a synonym for "abcast", so this change would drastically impact all
>existing code... but would it break anything?

Why not define this as a different protocol with a different name,
say a Per Group ABCAST.
It seems to me that, ISIS already provides a set of protocols
enforcing different ordering properties.
This will be one more protocol, appropriate for a certain class of
applications.

Mesaac