* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download ppt - Courses
Telephone exchange wikipedia , lookup
Computer network wikipedia , lookup
Windows Vista networking technologies wikipedia , lookup
History of telecommunication wikipedia , lookup
Telecommunications engineering wikipedia , lookup
History of network traffic models wikipedia , lookup
PSTN network topology wikipedia , lookup
Long-tail traffic wikipedia , lookup
Telecommunication wikipedia , lookup
TCP congestion control wikipedia , lookup
Serial digital interface wikipedia , lookup
Multiprotocol Label Switching wikipedia , lookup
Asynchronous Transfer Mode wikipedia , lookup
Quality of service wikipedia , lookup
Cracking of wireless networks wikipedia , lookup
Recursive InterNetwork Architecture (RINA) wikipedia , lookup
Network Architecture: Design Philosophies IS250 Spring 2010 John Chuang [email protected] Outline Design philosophy of ARPANET - Packet switching versus circuit switching End-to-end design principle Tussles in cyberspace Re-designing the Internet John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 2 History of the Internet 1961: 1969: 1974: 1983: 1984: 1995: Leonard Kleinrock: queuing theory shows effectiveness of packet switching Dept. of Defense (ARPA) sponsors the development of a packet-switched network, called the ARPANET. First four nodes at UCLA, SRI, Utah, UCSB. Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn proposes TCP/IP. ARPANET adopts TCP/IP. At this time, the ARPANET has 200 routers. National Science Foundation (NSF) funds a TCP/IP based backbone network. This backbone grows into the NSFNET, which becomes the successor of the ARPANET. NSF stops funding of NSFNET. The Internet is completely commercial. John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 3 ARPANET Design Philosophy Fundamental goal: - “Effective multiplexed utilization of interconnected networks” - Q: what was alternative? Fundamental structure of the Internet: - “A packet switched communications facility in which a number of distinguishable networks are connected together using packet communications processors called gateways which implement a store and forward packet forwarding algorithm” John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 4 Packet Switching vs. Circuit Switching “The technique selected for multiplexing was packet switching. An alternative such as circuit switching could have been considered, but the applications being supported, such as remote login, were naturally served by the packet switching paradigm” John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 5 Circuit Switching Circuit switching used in traditional telephony: - Requires establishment and teardown of circuit - Fixed bandwidth resources (e.g., 64kbps for voice channel) dedicated to each call, even if actual data transmission rate is lower - Not efficient for ‘bursty’ traffic sources - Low jitter (delay variations) important for real-time John Chuangapplications IS250 UC Berkeley 6 Packet Switching Data transmitted in small packets - Single message may be split into multiple packets - Every packet contains full control info (e.g., destination address) in header - Packets may take different paths - Packets may arrive out of order - Packets may be lost or corrupted (need recovery mechanism) Statistical multiplexing possible - Works well with ‘bursty’ traffic John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 7 Packet Switching vs. Circuit Switching “The technique selected for multiplexing was packet switching. An alternative such as circuit switching could have been considered, but the applications being supported, such as remote login, were naturally served by the packet switching paradigm” John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 10 ARPANET Design Goals Fundamental goal: - Effective multiplexed utilization of interconnected networks Second level goals: - Survivability Support multiple types of service Accommodate variety of networks Permit distributed management of resources Cost effective Host attachment with low level of effort Resource accountability John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 11 Discussion Did the ordering of the goals matter? What does ‘fate-sharing’ mean? What does ‘stateless packet switches’ mean? Can you think of additional goals not present in the original list? John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 12 End-to-End Argument What is the E2E argument? What is the connection between the E2E argument and “fate-sharing” and “stateless switches”? John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 13 End-to-End Argument In a layered architecture, how do you divide functionality across the layers? Application Layer HTTP, FTP, NNTP, SMTP, telnet, ... Transport Layer TCP, UDP Network Layer IP Data Link Layer Ethernet, FDDI, SONET Physical Layer coax, twisted pair, fiber, wireless, ... Appl end-to-end Appl Trans port end-to-end Trans port Net work Net work point-to-point Net work Net work Link Link point-to-point Link Link Host A John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley Router 1 Router 2 Host B 14 End-to-End Argument Think twice (or thrice) about implementing a functionality that you think is useful for an application at a lower layer What are the reasons for implementing a functionality at a lower layer? What are the costs/pitfalls of implementing a functionality at a lower layer? How is the E2E argument reflected (or not) in the TCP/IP architecture? John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 15 Tussle in Cyberspace Design principles - Design for variation in outcome - Modularize design along tussle boundaries - Design for choice John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 16 Tussle Spaces Economics - Consumer choice necessary for competition - Address portability (minimize switching cost) Value pricing (market segmentation; price discrimination) Open access User-directed routing Trust - Where to implement what functionality? - Who decides on policy? - Identity Innovation - Openness to innovation (E2E) - Incentives for innovation (user choice) John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 18 Redesigning the Internet Why? What’s wrong with the current Internet? John Chuang IS250 UC Berkeley 19