2. cnp3-ebook
3. English
4. Zen

107 ../../protocols/ethernet.rst:391
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — Assume that `Switch4` is the first to boot. It sends its own `BPDU = <4,0,4,1>` (resp. `BPDU = <4,0,4,2>`) on port 1 (resp. port 2). When `Switch1` boots, it sends `BPDU = <1,0,1,1>`. This `BPDU` is received by `Switch4`, which updates its `BPDU` and root priority vector tables and computes a new `BPDU = <1,3,4,1>` (resp. `BPDU = <1,3,4,2>`) on port 1 (resp. port 2). Indeed, there is only one root priority vector and hence, it is the best one. Port 1 of `Switch4` becomes the `Root` port while its second port is still in the `Designated` state. 549/10000 · 549
107 ../../protocols/ipv6.rst:378
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — In this optional header, the `Next Header` field is used to support the chain of headers. It indicates the type of the next header in the chain. IPv6 headers have different lengths. The `Hdr Ext Len` field indicates the total length of the option header in bytes. The `Opt. Type` field indicates the type of option. These types are encoded such that their high order bits specify how the header needs to be handled by nodes that do not recognize it. The following values are defined for the two high order bits : 512/10000 · 512
107 ../../protocols/ethernet.rst:366
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — Otherwise, the switch chooses the best priority vector from its table, `bv = <R,c+cost[q'],T,p,q'>`. The port `q'`, over which this best root priority vector was learned, is the switch port that is closest to the `root` switch. This port becomes the `Root` port of the switch. There is only one `Root` port per switch (except for the `Root` switches whose ports are all `Designated`). The switch can then compute its own `BPDU` as `BPDU = <R,c',S,p>` , where `R` is the `root identifier`, `c'` the cost of the best root priority vector, `S` the identifier of the switch and `p` will be replaced by the number of the port over which the `BPDU` will be sent. 656/10000 · 656
107 ../../protocols/tcp.rst:322
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — TCP windows 11/10000 · 11
107 ../../principles/network.rst:509
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — R2's label forwarding table 27/10000 · 27
107 ../../bibliography.rst:142
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — Mogul, J. , `The case for persistent-connection HTTP <http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/217382.217465>`_. In Proceedings of the Conference on Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols For Computer Communication (Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States, August 28 - September 01, 1995). D. Oran, Ed. SIGCOMM '95. ACM, New York, NY, 299-313. 347/10000 · 347
108 ../../glossary.rst:259
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — minicomputer 12/10000 · 12
108 ../../principles/network.rst:518
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — Two virtual circuits pass through `R3`. They both need to be forwarded to `R4`, but `R4` expects `label=1` for packets belonging to the virtual circuit originated by `R2` and `label=0` for packets belonging to the other virtual circuit. `R3` could choose to leave the labels unchanged. 285/10000 · 285
108 ../../principles/reliability.rst:429
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — Frames can be lost or unexpected frames can appear 50/10000 · 50
108 ../../principles/sharing.rst:674
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — The main difficulty with CSMA/CA is when two or more devices transmit at the same time and cause collisions. This is illustrated in the figure below, assuming a fixed timeout after the transmission of a data frame. With CSMA/CA, the timeout after the transmission of a data frame is very small, since it corresponds to the SIFS plus the time required to transmit the acknowledgment frame. 388/10000 · 388
108 ../../principles/security.rst:1019
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — A detailed explanation of the operation of the RSA algorithm is outside the scope of this e-book. Various tutorials such as the `RSA page <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSA_(cryptosystem)>`_ on wikipedia provide examples and tutorial information. 246/10000 · 246
108 ../../protocols/bgp.rst:413
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — In this internetwork, there are four ASes. `AS0` advertises one route towards one prefix and we only analyze the routes towards this prefix. The routing preferences of `AS1`, `AS3` and `AS4` are the following : 210/10000 · 210
108 ../../protocols/email.rst:248 • ../../protocols/email.rst:250
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — 8 1/10000 · 1
108 ../../protocols/ethernet.rst:393
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — Assume now that `Switch9` boots and immediately receives `Switch1` 's `BPDU` on port 1. `Switch9` computes its own `BPDU = <1,1,9,1>` (resp. `BPDU = <1,1,9,2>`) on port 1 (resp. port 2) and port 1 becomes the `Root` port of this switch. The `BPDU` is sent on port 2 of `Switch9` and reaches `Switch4`. `Switch4` compares the priority vectors. It notices that the last computed vector (i.e., `V[2] = <1,2,9,2,2>`) is better than `V[1] = <1,3,1,1,1>`. Thus, `Switch4`'s `BPDU` is recomputed and port 2 becomes the `Root` port of `Switch4`. `Switch4` compares its new `BPDU = <1,2,4,p>` with the last `BPDU` received on each port (except for the `Root` port). Port 1 becomes a `Blocked` port on `Switch4` because the `BPDU=<1,0,1,1>` received on this port is better. 763/10000 · 763
108 ../../protocols/ipv6.rst:380
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — ``00`` : if a node does not recognize this header, it can be safely skipped and the processing continues with the subsequent header 132/10000 · 132
108 ../../protocols/ethernet.rst:368
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — To determine the state of its other ports, the switch compares its own `BPDU` with the last `BPDU` received on each port. Note that the comparison is done by using the `BPDUs` and not the `root priority vectors`. If the switch's `BPDU` is better than the last `BPDU` of this port, the port becomes a `Designated` port. Otherwise, the port becomes a `Blocked` port. 364/10000 · 364
108 ../../protocols/tcp.rst:329
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — From a performance point of view, one of the main limitations of the original TCP specification is the 16 bits `window` field in the TCP header. As this field indicates the current size of the receive window in bytes, it limits the TCP receive window at 65535 bytes. This limitation was not a severe problem when TCP was designed since at that time high-speed wide area networks offered a maximum bandwidth of 56 kbps. However, in today's network, this limitation is not acceptable anymore. The table below provides the rough [#faveragebandwidth]_ maximum throughput that can be achieved by a TCP connection with a 64 KBytes window in function of the connection's round-trip-time 679/10000 · 679
108 ../../bibliography.rst:144
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — Modadugu, N. and Rescorla, E., 2004, February. `The Design and Implementation of Datagram TLS <https://www.ndss-symposium.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Modadugu.pdf>`_. In NDSS. 178/10000 · 178
108 ../../principles/transport.rst:644
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — The simplest approach to establish a transport connection would be to define two special control segments : `CR` (Connection Request) and `CA` (Connection Acknowledgment). The `CR` segment is sent by the transport entity that wishes to initiate a connection. If the remote entity wishes to accept the connection, it replies by sending a `CA` segment. The `CR` and `CA` segments contain `port numbers` that allow identifying the communicating applications. The transport connection is considered to be established once the `CA` segment has been received. At that point, data segments can be sent in both directions. 614/10000 · 614
109 ../../glossary.rst:261
	English ↹ ↵ NBS … “ ” ‘ ’ ﹙-﹚ ‐ – — A minicomputer is a multi-user system that was typically used in the 1960s/1970s to serve departments. See the corresponding Wikipedia article for additional information : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minicomputer 214/10000 · 214