国产探花免费观看_亚洲丰满少妇自慰呻吟_97日韩有码在线_资源在线日韩欧美_一区二区精品毛片,辰东完美世界有声小说,欢乐颂第一季,yy玄幻小说排行榜完本

首頁 > 學(xué)院 > 網(wǎng)絡(luò)通信 > 正文

RFC613 - Network connectivity: A response to RFC603

2019-11-04 11:18:26
字體:
供稿:網(wǎng)友

  Network Working Group Alex McKenzie
RFC# 613 BBN-NET
NIC # 21525 January 21, 1974

Network connectivity: A response to RFC#603

Network topology is a complicated political and economic question with
obvious technical overtones. I shall not attempt, in this note, to
cover all the possible arguments which might be made, but merely to
respond directly to the points raised in RFC#603.

1. The important consideration in deciding whether it is good or
bad to have a node (AMES) be four connected is not how many circuits
are affected by a node failure; rather one should consider how well
the network is still connected after a node failure. For example,
if ALL nodes in the network were four-connected I douBT that anyone
would argue that this was bad for reliability. The weaknesses are
not the three-connected and four-connected nodes but rather the
ONE-connected (Hawaii, London) and two-connected nodes. I must
agree with Burchfiel's implied argument that it is better to have
two adjacent three-connected nodes than to have a four-connected
node adjacent to a two-connected node; unfortunately the realities
of installing interfaces and common carrier services cause the
Network to eXPand in sub-optimal ways.

2. "Loops" are not good per se, they appear good because the act of
making loops increases the connectivity and thereby redUCes the
effect of multiple failures. Adding more circuits costs ARPA money,
both capital cost for IMP interfaces and recurring cost for the
circuits. The network group at BBN has suggested to ARPA several
times that "connectivity should be increased" but it was only late
in December 1973 that we made specific suggestions for the locations
of additional circuits. These recommendations were not based on
building loops (although they may have that effect) but were based
on breaking the long chains of IMPs which have occurred as the
Network has grown. ARPA and NAC are now PResumably in the process
of evaluating our suggestions, and perhaps formulating other
possibilities.

[ This RFCwas put into machine readable form for entry ]
[ into the online RFCarchives by Alex McKenzie with ]
[ support from GTE, formerly BBN Corp. 10/99 ]

發(fā)表評(píng)論 共有條評(píng)論
用戶名: 密碼:
驗(yàn)證碼: 匿名發(fā)表
主站蜘蛛池模板: 长沙市| 宜都市| 关岭| 通州区| 刚察县| 湟源县| 辉县市| 岐山县| 汉沽区| 翁源县| 宁南县| 建始县| 湛江市| 海安县| 上犹县| 清水河县| 鱼台县| 洛扎县| 龙南县| 德格县| 灵宝市| 济阳县| 波密县| 大田县| 阿拉尔市| 肇庆市| 长寿区| 玛沁县| 大渡口区| 琼海市| 尼勒克县| 阿图什市| 江口县| 竹溪县| 宁海县| 永仁县| 秦皇岛市| 泌阳县| 武鸣县| 上虞市| 大丰市|