Re: Port numbers in the network layer?
[email protected] (Noel Chiappa)
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.end2end |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
> From: Detlef Bosau <[email protected]> > X.25 to my understanding is circuit switched. ... The same holds true > for Frame Relay in a sense, however in FR the whole packets are switched > IIRC and not subdivided into smaller pieces. That's not the most important characteristic of 'circuit switched', and in fact, to me 'circuit switched' is characterized by a number of things (i.e. it's not a single characteristic, but a suite of them). So, for instance, when I head 'circuit switched', I think of things like 'per-connection state _in the network_ (not just at the hosts)', 'setup required _in the network_ before communication can happen', 'reliability is _in the network_, not done by the hosts'. An important corollary is that there are a whole range of different things which are not "circuit switched", but still have _some_ of the characteristics that define that model. So Frame Relay has some of these aspects - but so did the ARPANET. At one point, Dave Clark started this concept that 'pure packet switched models have some advantages, but some disadvantges, and pure circuit switched models have some advantages, but some disadvantges, and the way to get all the advantages and (mostly) none of the disadvantages is to have something which is mid-way between the two'. So things like RSVP, for instance, bring some (not all!) of the hallmarks of circuit switching into the packet switching world. But "circuit switched" != "not packet switched"! The world is bigger than that... Noel