Thread View: comp.protocols.iso
3 messages
3 total messages
Started by Daryl Morse
Tue, 12 Feb 1991 15:25
Transparent Distribution - Why no light-weight transport in OSI stack?
Author: Daryl Morse
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 1991 15:25
Date: Tue, 12 Feb 1991 15:25
37 lines
2522 bytes
2522 bytes
In all of the reading on OSI (both standards and otherwise) that I have done, I have noticed what seems to be an inconsistency in the conceptual model that forms the basis for the OSI. The seeming "inconsistency" is as follows: In both name, and in the actual protocols that are in the stack, OSI is pretty clearly aimed at the connection of systems. We can see this by virtue of the types of end to end communications that have been standardized. All are aimed at system to system communication. However, if you look at the structure of the application layer, the picture seems to change. Indeed, the name of the upper-most layer seems to verify that the OSI is also aimed at the connection of applications. This is reinforced by the preliminary work that I have reviewed on the ODP (Open Distributed Processing) Reference Model. This also seems to be clearly aimed providing transparent distribution at the application level. Why, then, is there no light-weight mechanism for applications to communicate with other applications that might happen to be located on the same system? If I don't want my application to know where it is, or where the applications that it communicates with are, shouldn't that be addressed (no pun intended) by the stack? Surely, I shouldn't be reasonably expected to use X.25, or FDDI, for IPC. (Something related to this is the lack of a decent performing name service. X.500 is clearly not a great name service for an RPC.) Am I all wet here, and it really isn't the intention of the OSI that application entities might reside on the same system? Perhaps I'm just impatient, and these issues will be addressed by the ODP work? If you have any thoughts on these matters, I would be most interested in hearing them. Thanks. -- Daryl Morse | Voice : (604) 293-5476 MPR Teltech Ltd. | Fax : (604) 293-5787 8999 Nelson Way, Burnaby, BC | E-Mail: morse@quark.mpr.ca Canada, V5A 4B5 | quark.mpr.ca!morse@uunet.uu.net
Re: Transparent Distribution - Why no light-weight transport in OSI stack?
Author: Michael Dobbins
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 1991 14:57
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 1991 14:57
26 lines
2173 bytes
2173 bytes
In article <MORSE.91Feb12152547@quark.mpr.ca> morse@quark.mpr.ca (Daryl Morse) writes: >[stuff deleted] >Why, then, is there no light-weight mechanism for applications to >communicate with other applications that might happen to be located on >the same system? If I don't want my application to know where it is, >or where the applications that it communicates with are, shouldn't >that be addressed (no pun intended) by the stack? Surely, I shouldn't >be reasonably expected to use X.25, or FDDI, for IPC. (Something >related to this is the lack of a decent performing name service. X.500 >is clearly not a great name service for an RPC.) > >Am I all wet here, and it really isn't the intention of the OSI that >application entities might reside on the same system? Perhaps I'm just >impatient, and these issues will be addressed by the ODP work? My understanding of the intention of OSI (at least a couple of years ago) is to standardize Intersystem communication. Any intrasystem issues were considered private to that system and not to be defined by OSI. This includes layer boundry interfaces. It is not inconsistent for a system to provide a local IPC mechanism which appears the same as the remote IPC mechanism to an application. IMHO, that is the right thing to do. The local mechanisms have not been within the scope of OSI definition. On the other hand, other groups have been working on standardizing local system interfaces and API's, ex. TLI for unix. This work may result in the 'defacto' standards for local 'light weight' mechanisms that you are looking for.
Transparent Distribution - Why no light-weight transport in OSI stack?
Author: Erik Skovgaard
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 1991 16:36
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 1991 16:36
15 lines
1014 bytes
1014 bytes
OSI is intended to be used between processes on different systems.
Whatever takes place on a single system is outside the scope of OSI, but
as you point out, this will be taken up in the ODP framework.
Other organizations such as X/Open, IEEE and the API Association have
decided to standardize APIs for internal use on a computer system. As
it turns out, many of these APIs reflect the Abstract Services of
several ASEs.
....Erik.
---------------------------------
Erik Skovgaard
PSC (Pacific) Inc
Vancouver, B.C.
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads