Why wait for the rabid bite of a problem withou a solution?

Donald Holman (don@sri-lewis.arpa)
Wed, 9 Dec 87 14:33:36 PST

To those that listen with appologies to those that don't:

I left the TCP/IP conference (Monterey East) with a few items
that appeared to be without solution in the near future. I query
the mailing list in an effort to solicit for ideas from
the collective body on each of these areas. One or all of these will
be of interest to my efforts in the near future, thus why wait for
the rabid bite of a problem without solution. Probably be inundated with
flaming broadcast storms over these questions, but here goes.


Glossary of terms and acronyms:

Standard - an accepted degree or level of excellence.
TIA - That Is All.

1) SLIP LINK ESTABLISHMENT, there is no standard link establishment
procedure/protocol for SLIP which presents problems when attempting
to utilize SLIP in a dialup or various other modes. There are additional
problems which are related to address mapping for the user of a
SLIP port, which incidently may cause problems with security.
Is anyone working on a solution to this, or is there
an existing solution may have the pleasing aroma of a standard?

2) SECURITY, various vendors of IP routers touted the ability to discriminate
for/against packets based on the security field found in the IP portion of a
datagram header. The present problem with this is that there is no
provision in any of the ARPA/DDN upper layer protocols for setting
this security bit (or is there?). How does one determine to set the bit
since SMTP, FTP etc. does not provide the mechanics for passing this
security information to the network layer?

3) ROUTING METRICS. Most gateway routing decisions are determined by hop count
or minimum path. This is not always the best approach since the minimum path may
not be the best path. Example: who cares if the packet traverses 5 hops
to get to the destination if the 5 hop path is more economical/better than the 2
hop path. Is there a published method that is better than min_hop?

4) LEASED LINES FOR DDN. The DDN may not be able to afford all of the dedicated
leased lines which are to be in service over the next several years. Is there an
alternative to leased lines? Perhaps something that utilizes dial-up in conjunction
with a machine-machine (read uucp-uucp) transfer of queued information. This
could reduce the need for high-cost leased lines in selected cases.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 09 2000 - 14:39:57 GMT