home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Request for Comments # 210 W. Conrad
- Categories C.4 Harvard
- NIC 7189 16 August 71
-
- Improvement of Flow Control
-
- The current "give back" - "return" scheme seems to put the cart before
- the horse in that the "return" command indicates the amount of space
- the sending host is returning rather than the amount of space it has
- left after decrementing by the amount specified in the "give back"
- command. Considering the fact that allocation counters at sending and
- receiving hosts may get out of synchronization and the fact that the
- receiving host has a preemptive priority in the allocation of its
- resources, it is only logical that the receiving host be able to find
- out exactly how much of its buffer space a sending host thinks it can
- claim.
-
- If the "return" command is to accurately reflect a sending host's
- current allocation, and if successive "give backs" are to produce
- "return" commands which can be properly interpreted, certain race
- conditions must be avoided. A "give back" must be answered by a
- "return" and no more "give backs" can be issued until that "return" is
- received. In some sense, a "return" command as here proposed is
- really a give back reply, and, perhaps, should implemented under that
- name. On the sending side, the "return" command must not be issued as
- long as a data RFNM is awaited on the link to which the "return"
- refers. As soon as the net is clear of data messages, the "return" may
- be sent and data transmission may continue when the RFNM for this
- message containing the "return" command is received.
-
- The current "give back" command uses fractions and has a format
- different from the "allocate" and "return" commands making processing
- unnecessarily complicated. By adopting the convention that allocations
- can not be decremented below zero, one can safely specify absolute
- decrements in a format like that of the "allocate" command. If the
- receiving host's estimate of a suitable decrement is inaccurate, no
- harm is done and the "return" command in response to the "give back"
- provides immediate corrective information.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- [Page 1]
-
- SUMMARY
-
- Proposal Advantage
-
- 1 "Return" specifies amount Provides more pertinent
- of space left after information and a means
- decrementing. of resynchronization other
- than closing connection.
-
- 2 "Give Back" must get Provide more accurate
- "return" in reply and allocation information
- "return" must not be by eliminating race
- sent with data on the conditions.
- link.
-
- 3 Eliminate fractions Eliminate messy math
- from "give back". and provide symmetry
- to allocation commands
- making processing easier.
-
-
-
- [ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry ]
- [ into the online RFC archives by Gunnar Reichert 6/97 ]
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- [Page 2]
-
-