Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!yoyo.aarnet.edu.au!news.adelaide.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!wubios.wustl.edu!david From: david@wubios.wustl.edu (David J Camp) Subject: CLNP Observations Message-ID: <1994Apr2.144036.22315@wubios.wustl.edu> Sender: david@wubios.wustl.edu (David J Camp) Organization: Division of Biostatistics, WUMS, St. Louis, MO Date: Sat, 2 Apr 1994 14:40:36 GMT Lines: 32 I have heard that ISODE runs on top of the TCP/IP protocol as a piggyback protocol. If CLNP were adopted as the Internet Protocol, perhaps ISODE could use it directly. I have been reading CLNP rfc994.txt from wuarchive.wustl.edu:doc/rfc and cannot verify that it is truly IP compatible, since it spends so much time talking about OSI. The TUBA RFC seems to suggest this, and provides a sane transition mechanism, provided that you can read postscript. FreeBSD has a clnp man page, but it seems to treat CLNP sockets as a separate domain from TCP/IP. I suggest that CLNP be treated as the next version of TCP/IP (provided that it is adequate), and given an initial version number (found in the IP packet) that is the increment of the current IP version. There needs to be some means of partitioning the CLNP address space. We could do something simple minded and give all comers a 32-bit network space, but that would lead to rapid expansion of the size of the address size. I think I saw some RFCs dealing with this issue though. Meanwhile, we all need a means of getting CLNP addresses easily. I contacted SRI but am behind in my mail, and am not sure if they replied. It is essential that TUBA be supported under FreeBSD in order to make proper use of CLNP. -David- # david@wubios.wustl.edu David J. Camp BS MS ^ # # david@campfire.stl.mo.us +1 314 382 0584 < * > # # I am a member of: The League for Programming Freedom. v # # abs (investment#1 - investment#2) << abs (anyinvestment - anydebt) #