Exit Zen
193
../../principles/linkstate.rst:100
English
As link state packets are flooded regularly, routers are able to measure the quality (e.g. delay or load) of their links and adjust the metric of each link according to its current quality. Such dynamic adjustments were included in the ARPANET routing protocol [MRR1979]_ . However, experience showed that it was difficult to tune the dynamic adjustments and ensure that no forwarding loops occur in the network [KZ1989]_. Today's link state routing protocols use metrics that are manually configured on the routers and are only changed by the network operators or network management tools [FRT2002]_.
0/6010 · 601
193
../../principles/reliability.rst:790
English
The `selective repeat` sender maintains a sending buffer that can store up to `W` unacknowledged frames. These frames are sent as long as the sending buffer is not full. Several implementations of a `selective repeat` sender are possible. A simple implementation associates one retransmission timer to each frame. The timer is started when the frame is sent and canceled upon reception of an acknowledgment that covers this frame. When a retransmission timer expires, the corresponding frame is retransmitted and this retransmission timer is restarted. When an acknowledgment is received, all the frames that are covered by this acknowledgment are removed from the sending buffer and the sliding window is updated.
0/7140 · 714
194
../../glossary.rst:20
English
a transmission mode where an information is sent from one source to one recipient
0/810 · 81
194
../../principles/linkstate.rst:104
English
When a link fails, the two routers attached to the link detect the failure by the absence of HELLO messages received during the last :math:`k \times N` seconds. Once a router has detected the failure of one of its local links, it generates and floods a new LSP that no longer contains the failed link. This new LSP replaces the previous LSP in the network. In practice, the two routers attached to a link do not detect this failure exactly at the same time. During this period, some links may be announced in only one direction. This is illustrated in the figure below. Router `E` has detected the failure of link `E-B` and flooded a new LSP, but router `B` has not yet detected this failure.
0/6920 · 692
194
../../principles/reliability.rst:792
English
The figure below illustrates the operation of `selective repeat` when frames are lost. In this figure, `C(OK,x)` is used to indicate that all frames, up to and including sequence number `x` have been received correctly.
0/2190 · 219
195
../../glossary.rst:292
English
vnc
0/100 · 3
195
../../principles/reliability.rst:798
English
Selective repeat : example
0/260 · 26
195
../../principles/sharing.rst:1331
English
Some networking technologies allow to adjust dynamically the bandwidth of links. For example, some devices can reduce their bandwidth to preserve energy. We ignore these technologies in this basic course and assume that all links used inside the network have a fixed bandwidth.
0/2770 · 277
196
../../glossary.rst:294
English
A networked application that allows to remotely access a computer's Graphical User Interface. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_Network_Computing
0/1530 · 153
196
../../principles/reliability.rst:802
English
Pure cumulative acknowledgments work well with the `go-back-n` strategy. However, with only cumulative acknowledgments a `selective repeat` sender cannot easily determine which frames have been correctly received after a data frame has been lost. For example, in the figure above, the second `C(OK,0)` does not inform explicitly the sender of the reception of `D(2,c)` and the sender could retransmit this frame although it has already been received. A possible solution to improve the performance of `selective repeat` is to provide additional information about the received frames in the acknowledgments that are returned by the receiver. For example, the receiver could add in the returned acknowledgment the list of the sequence numbers of all frames that have already been received. Such acknowledgments are sometimes called `selective acknowledgments`. This is illustrated in the figure above.
0/8990 · 899
196
../../principles/sharing.rst:1333
English
In this section, we focus on congestion control mechanisms that regulate the transmission rate of the hosts. Other types of mechanisms have been proposed in the literature. For example, `credit-based` flow-control has been proposed to avoid congestion in ATM networks [KR1995]_. With a credit-based mechanism, hosts can only send packets once they have received credits from the routers and the credits depend on the occupancy of the router's buffers.
0/4510 · 451
197
../../glossary.rst:45
English
W3C
0/100 · 3
197
../../principles/linkstate.rst:116
English
When a router has failed, its LSP must be removed from the LSDB of all routers [#foverload]_. This can be done by using the `age` field that is included in each LSP. The `age` field is used to bound the maximum lifetime of a link state packet in the network. When a router generates a LSP, it sets its lifetime (usually measured in seconds) in the `age` field. All routers regularly decrement the `age` of the LSPs in their LSDB and a LSP is discarded once its `age` reaches `0`. Thanks to the `age` field, the LSP from a failed router does not remain in the LSDBs forever.
0/5730 · 573
197
../../principles/reliability.rst:811
English
In the figure above, when the sender receives `C(OK,0,[2])`, it knows that all frames up to and including `D(0,...)` have been correctly received. It also knows that frame `D(2,...)` has been received and can cancel the retransmission timer associated to this frame. However, this frame should not be removed from the sending buffer before the reception of a cumulative acknowledgment (`C(OK,2)` in the figure above) that covers this frame.
0/4400 · 440
197
../../principles/sharing.rst:1335
English
For example, the measurements performed in the Sprint network in 2004 reported more than 10k active TCP connections on a link, see https://research.sprintlabs.com/packstat/packetoverview.php. More recent information about backbone links may be obtained from caida_ 's real-time measurements, see e.g. http://www.caida.org/data/realtime/passive/
0/3450 · 345
198
../../glossary.rst:47
English
The world wide web consortium was created to standardize the protocols and mechanisms used in the world wide web. It is thus focused on a subset of the application layer. See https://www.w3.org
0/1930 · 193
198
../../principles/linkstate.rst:118
English
To compute its forwarding table, each router computes the spanning tree rooted at itself by using Dijkstra's shortest path algorithm [Dijkstra1959]_. The forwarding table can be derived automatically from the spanning as shown in the figure below.
0/2470 · 247
198
../../principles/reliability.rst:815
English
Maximum window size with `go-back-n` and `selective repeat`
0/590 · 59
199
../../glossary.rst:33
English
WAN
0/100 · 3
199
../../principles/reliability.rst:817
English
A reliable protocol that uses `n` bits to encode its sequence number can send up to :math:`2^n` successive frames. However, to ensure a reliable delivery of the frames, `go-back-n` and `selective repeat` cannot use a sending window of :math:`2^n` frames. Consider first `go-back-n` and assume that a sender sends :math:`2^n` frames. These frames are received in-sequence by the destination, but all the returned acknowledgments are lost. The sender will retransmit all frames. These frames will all be accepted by the receiver and delivered a second time to the user. It is easy to see that this problem can be avoided if the maximum size of the sending window is :math:`{2^n}-1` frames. A similar problem occurs with `selective repeat`. However, as the receiver accepts out-of-sequence frames, a sending window of :math:`{2^n}-1` frames is not sufficient to ensure a reliable delivery. It can be easily shown that to avoid this problem, a `selective repeat` sender cannot use a window that is larger than :math:`\frac{2^n}{2}` frames.
0/10350 · 1035