Path: utzoo!utgpu!BITNIC!FUTURE-L Date: Wed, 28 Feb 90 10:20:00 EST Reply-To: BITNET Futures List Sender: BITNET Futures List From: Doron Shikmoni Subject: Re: The fall of Bitnet To: UofToronto LAN redistribution Message-ID: <90Feb28.124512est.57389@ugw.utcs.utoronto.ca> Newsgroups: list.future-l Distribution: ut Approved: devnull@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu Alan Fontaine writes: > This leads to some stupid things. An example : messages and files are > handled by the same monolith, so, unless there are things I am not aware > of, messages follow the same routes as files. While a multiple hop S&F > strategy is fine for files, it does not make any sense for messages, to > which it only adds delay and processing overhead while gaining nothing, > since a message is dropped at the first down link encountered..... Indeed messages are following the same routes as files, but they are not "Stored", in the sense of putting them to disk or something. In this sense, they are simply handed over by the communication software, as "esoteric packets" - if you think of it, it makes sense to do it. > I am > also wondering (but have no definitive idea) if it is wise to try to > multiplex several data streams on a single TCP connection. The tradition > seems to go in the opposite direction (99% of the FTP sessions involve > at least two connections between a pair of hosts, for example), for the > benefit of simplicity in the application protocols if for no other > reason. It is definitely unwise to go into trouble multiplexing streams over a virtual link that is already multipexed. Of course. Had NJE-like service been developed over a TCP-like protocol, it would most likely have used several TCP streams. I think most people agree that NJE over TCP (why, BTW, is it refered to as NJE over IP?) is not an optimized solution in any way, just an intermediate ad-hoc bridge between two very different network services. All in all, I do agree that NJE over TCP is not a way to go, in the *long* run. Definitely, NJE-like services *can* be developed in the TCP/IP suite. The thing is, that they are currently missing (I do not consider TALK to be similar to the NJE unsolicited-message/command service - and this is not to say any of them is superior. They are just not similar services). Doron