The translation has come to an end.
Exit Zen
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
200
../../glossary.rst:35
English
Wide Area Network
0/170 · 17
200
../../principles/linkstate.rst:129
English
It should be noted that link state routing assumes that all routers in the network have enough memory to store the entire LSDB. The routers that do not have enough memory to store the entire LSDB cannot participate in link state routing. Some link state routing protocols allow routers to report that they do not have enough memory and must be removed from the graph by the other routers in the network, but this is outside the scope of this e-book.
0/4490 · 449
200
../../principles/reliability.rst:863
English
Reliable protocols often need to send data in both directions. To reduce the overhead caused by the acknowledgments, most reliable protocols use `piggybacking`. Thanks to this technique, a datalink entity can place the acknowledgments and the receive window that it advertises for the opposite direction of the data flow inside the header of the data frames that it sends. The main advantage of piggybacking is that it reduces the overhead as it is not necessary to send a complete frame to carry an acknowledgment. This is illustrated in the figure below where the acknowledgment number is underlined in the data frames. Piggybacking is only used when data flows in both directions. A receiver will generate a pure acknowledgment when it does not send data in the opposite direction as shown in the bottom of the figure.
0/8210 · 821
201
../../glossary.rst:223
English
X.25
0/100 · 4
201
../../principles/reliability.rst:869
English
Piggybacking example
0/200 · 20
202
../../glossary.rst:225
English
A wide area networking technology using virtual circuits that was deployed by telecommunication operators.
0/1060 · 106
202
../../principles/reliability.rst:877
English
SDU is the acronym of Service Data Unit. We use it as a generic term to represent the data that is transported by a protocol.
0/1250 · 125
203
../../glossary.rst:207
English
X11
0/100 · 3
203
../../principles/reliability.rst:879
English
The size of the sliding window can be either fixed for a given protocol or negotiated during the connection establishment phase. Some protocols allow to change the maximum window size during the data transfer. We will explain these techniques with real protocols later.
0/2690 · 269
204
../../glossary.rst:209
English
The XWindow system and the associated protocols are defined in [SG1990]_
0/720 · 72
205
../../glossary.rst:265
English
XML
0/100 · 3