Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

UNKNOWN
Network Working Group                                          J. NewkirkRequest for Comments: 55                                        M. Kraley                                                                  Harvard                                                                J. Postel                                                               S. Crocker                                                                     UCLA                                                             19 June 1970A Prototypical Implementation of the NCP   While involved in attempting to specify the formal protocol, we also   attempted to formulate a prototypical NCP in an Algol-like language.   After some weeks of concentrated effort, the project was abandoned as   we realized that the code was becoming unreadable.  We still,   however, felt the need to demonstrate our conception of how an NCP   might be implemented; we felt that this would help suggest solutions   for problems that might arise in trying to mold the formal   specifications into an existing system.  This document is that   attempt to specify in a prose format what an NCP could look like.   There are obvious limitations on a project of this nature.  We do   not, and cannot, know all of the quirks of the various systems that   must write an NCP.  We are forced to make some assumptions about the   environment, system calls, and the like.  We have tried to be as   general as possible, but no doubt many sites will have completely   different ways of conceptualizing the NCP.  There is great difficulty   involved in conveying our concepts and the mechanisms that deal with   these concepts to people who have wholly different ways of looking at   things.  We have, however, benefited greatly by trying to actually   code this program for our fictitious machine.  Many unforeseen   problems surfaced during the coding, and we hope that by issuing this   document we can help to alleviate similar problems which may arise in   individual cases.   There is, of course, absolutely no requirement to implement anything   which is contained in this document.  The only rigid rules which an   NCP _must_ conform to are stated in NWG/RFC#54.  This description is   intended only as an example, _not_ as a model.   In the discussion which follows we first describe the environment to   be assumed and postulate a set of system calls.  We discuss the   overall architecture of the NCP and the tables that will be used to   hold relevant information.  Narratives of network operations follow.   A state diagram is then presented as a convenient method for   conceptualizing the cause-effect sequencing of events.  The detailed   processing of each type of network event (system calls or incoming   network messages) is then discussed.Newkirk, et al.                                                 [Page 1]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970II. Environment   We assume that the host will have a time-sharing operating system in   which the CPU is shared by processes.   We envision that each process is tagged with a user number.  There   may be more than one process with the same user number; if so, they   should all be cooperating with respect to using the network.   We envision that each process contains a set of ports which are   unique to the process.  These ports are used for input to or output   from the process, from or to files, devices, or other processes.   We also envision that a process is not put to sleep (i.e., blocked or   dismissed) when it attempts to LISTEN or CONNECT.  Instead it is   informed when some action is complete.  Of course, a process may   dismiss itself so that it wakes up only on some external event.   To engage in network activity, a process attaches a local socket to   one of its ports.  Sockets are identified by user number, host and   AEN; a socket is local to a process if the user numbers of the two   match and they are in the same host.  Thus, a process need only   specify an AEN when it is referring to a local socket.   Each port has a status which is modified by system calls and   concurrent events outside the process (e.g., a 'close connection'   command from a foreign host).  The process may look at a port's   status as any time (via the STATUS system call).   We assume a one-to-one correspondence between ports and sockets.III. System Calls   These are typical system calls which a user process might execute.         We use the notation                  SYSCALL (ARG1, ARG2....)         where                  SYSCALL is the name of the system call         and                  ARGk, etc. are the parameters of the system call.Newkirk, et al.                                                 [Page 2]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970   CONNECT (P, AEN, FS, CR)         P        specifies a port of the process         AEN      specifies a local socket; the user number and host are                  implicit         FS       specifies a socket with any user number in any hose,                  and with any AEN         CR       the condition code returned      CONNECT attempts to attach the local socket specified by AEN to      the port P and to initiate a connection with a specific foreign      socket, FS.  Possible values of CR are:         CR=OK          The CONNECT was legal and the socket FS is being                        contacted.  When the connection is established                        or refused the status will be updated.         CR = BUSY      The local socket is in use (illegal command                        sequence).         CR = BADSKT    The socket specification was illegal.         CR = NOROOM    Local host's resources are exhausted.         CR = HOMOSEX   Incorrect send/receive pair         CR = IMP DEAD  Our imp has died         CR = LINK DEAD The link to the foreign host is dead because:                        1. the foreign Imp is dead,                        2. the foreign host is dead, or                        3. the foreign NCP does not respond.   LISTEN (P, AEN, CR)         P             specifies a port of the process         AEN           specifies a local socket         CR            the condition code returned      The local socket specified by AEN is attached to port P.  If there      is a pending call, it is processed; otherwise, no action is taken.      When a call comes in, the user will be notified.  After examining      the call, he may either accept or refuse it.  Possible values of      CR are:         CR = OK         Connection begun, listening         CR = BUSYNewkirk, et al.                                                 [Page 3]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970         CR = NOROOM         CR = IMP DEAD         CR = LINK DEAD   ACCEPT (P, CR)         P       specifies a port of the process         CR      the condition code returned      Accept implies that the user process has inspected the foreign      socket to determine who is calling and will accept the call.      (Note: an interesting alternative defines ACCEPT as the implicit      default condition.  Thus any incoming RFC automatically satisfies      a LISTEN.)  Possible values of CR are:         CR = BADSKT         CR = NOROOM         CR = IMP DEAD         CR = LINK DEAD         CR = BADCOMM   Illegal command sequence. (E.g., Accept issued                        before a LISTEN.         CR = PREMCLS   Foreign user aborted connection after RFC was                        locally received but before Accept was executed.   TRANSMIT (P, BUFF, BITSRQST, BITSACC, CR)         P        specifies a port of the process         BUFF     specifies the text buffer for transmission         BITSRQST specifies the length to be transmitted in bits         BITSACC  returns the number of bits actually transmitted         CR       the condition code returned       Transmission takes place.   Possible values for CR are:         CR = OK         CR = IMP DEAD         CR = LINK DEADNewkirk, et al.                                                 [Page 4]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970         CR = NOT OPEN  Connection is not open (illegal command                        sequence).         CR = BAD BOUND BITSRQST out of bounds (e.g., for a receive                        socket BUFF was shorter than BITSRQST                        indicated).   INT (P, CR)         P       specifies the local socket of this process         CR      the condition code returned      The process on the other (foreign) side of this port is to be      interrupted.  Possible values of CR are:         CR = OK         CR = BADSKT         CR = BADCOMM         CR = IMP DEAD         CR = LINK DEAD   STATUS (P, RTAB, CR)         P       specifies a port of this process         RTAB    the returned rendezvous table entry         CR      the condition code returned      The relevant fields of the rendezvous table entry associated with      this port are returned in RTAB.  This is the mechanism a user      process employs for monitoring the state of a connection.      Possible values of CR are:         CR = OK         CR = BADSKTNewkirk, et al.                                                 [Page 5]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970   CLOSE (P, CR)         P       specifies a port of this process         CR      the condition code returned      Activity on the connection attached to this port stops, the      connection is broken and the port becomes free for other use.      Possible values of CR are:         CR = OK         CR = BADSKT         CR = BADCOMM         CR = IMP DEAD         CR = LINK DEADIV.  The NCP - Gross Structure   We view the NCP as having five component programs, several   associative tables, and some queues and buffers.      The Component Programs (see Fig. 4.1)      1. The Input Handler         This is an interrupt-driven routine.  It initiates Imp-to-Host         transmission into a resident buffer and wakes up the input         interpreter when transmission is complete.      2. The Output Handler         This is an interrupt-driven output routine.  It initiates Host-         to-Imp transmission out of a resident buffer and wakes up the         output scheduler when transmission is complete.      3. The Input Interpreter         This program decides whether the input is a regular message         intended for a user, a network control message, an Imp-to Host         message, or an error.  For each class of message this program         invokes a subroutine to take the appropriate action.Newkirk, et al.                                                 [Page 6]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970      4. The Output Scheduler         Three classes of messages are sent to the Imp            (a) Host-to-Imp messages            (b) Control messages            (c) Regular messages         We believe that a priority should be imposed among these         classes.  The priority we suggest is the ordering above.  The         output scheduler selects the highest priority message and         passes it to the output handler.         Host-to-Imp messages are processed first come first served.         Control messages are processed individually by host, each host         being taken in turn.  A control message queue for each foreign         host is provided.  When any particular host is scheduled for         output, as many control commands for that host as will fit are         concatenated into a single message.  Regular messages are         processed in groups by host and link, each unique combination         being taken in turn.      5. The System Call Interpreter         This program interprets requests from the user.  Each system         call has a corresponding routine which takes the appropriate         action.      The two interesting components are the input interpreter and the      system call interpreter.  These are similar in that the input      interpreter services foreign requests and the system call      interpreter services local requests.      The diagram in Figure 4.1  is our conception of the Network      Control Program.  Squishy amoeba-like objects represent component      programs, cylinders represent queues, and the arrows represent      data paths.  In this simplified diagram tables are not shown.      ["Amoeba-like" objects in original hand drawing are now firm      rectangular boxes: Ed.]      The abbreviated labels in the figure have the following meanings:            HIQ       -     Host-to-Imp Queue            OCCQ      -     Output Control Command Queue            DQ        -     Data Queue            IHBUF     -     Input Handler Buffer            OHBUF     -     Output Handler BufferNewkirk, et al.                                                 [Page 7]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970             ____________            |    USER    |    STRUCTURE OF THE NETWORK CONTROL PROGRAM            |____________|               ^      |                      Fig. 4.1          _____|______V____         |                 |         |     System      |         |      Call       |         |   Interpreter   |         |_________________|              _____________            ^  |      |                  |             |            |  |      |  +---------------|    Input    |            |  |      |  |         +-----| Interpreter |            |  |      |  |         |     |             |            |  V      V  V         V      -------------          |======| |=========| |=======|     |      ^          | D Q  | | O C C Q | | H I Q |     |      |          |======| |=========| |=======|     |      |            |  ^        |          |         |      |            |  |        |          |         |      |            |  +--------)----------)---------+      |            |           |          |                |            +-------+   |   +------+                |                  __V___V___V__                     |                 |             |                    |                 |   Output    |                    |                 |  Scheduler  |                    |                 |_____________|                    |                        |                           |                        V                           |                  (===========)               (===========)                  ( O H B U F )               ( I H B U F )                  (===========)               (===========)                        |                           ^                  ______V______               ______|______                 |             |             |             |                 |   Output    |             |    Input    |                 |   Handler   |             |   Handler   |                 |             |             |             |                  -------------               -------------                        |                           ^                        |                           |                        +----------+    +-----------+                                   |    |                               ____V____|____                              |              |                              |     I M P    |                              |______________|Newkirk, et al.                                                 [Page 8]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970V. Tables in the NCP   We envision that the bulk of the NCP's data base is in associative   tables.  By "associative" we mean that there is some lookup routine   which is presented with a key and either returns successfully with a   pointer to the corresponding entry, or fails if no entry corresponds   to the key.  The major tables are as follows:      1. The Rendezvous Table         This table holds the attributes of a connection.  The table is         accessed by the local socket, but other tables may have         pointers to existing entries.         The components of an entry are:            (a) Local Socket            (b) Foreign Socket            (c) Link            (d) Connection State            (e) Flow State            (f) Data Queue            (g) Call Queue            (h) Port Pointer            (i) Their Buffer Size (only needed on the send side)            (j) Error State         An entry is created when either a CONNECT or a LISTEN system         call is executed or when a request for connection is received.         Various fields remain unused until after the connection is         established.      2. The Input Link Table         The input interpreter uses the concatenation of the foreign         host and link as a key into the input table.  The table is used         in processing a user-destined message on an incoming link by         providing a pointer into the rendezvous table.      3. The Output Link Table         The input interpreter uses the output link table to access the         flow state as RFNM's return from transmitted messages.  The         output link table is keyed by host and link and provides a         pointer into the rendezvous table.Newkirk, et al.                                                 [Page 9]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970      4. The Port Table         The system call interpreter uses the concatenation of the         process identification and the port identification as a key to         obtain a pointer into the rendezvous table.      5. The Output Control Command Table         The system call interpreter and the input interpreter use this         table to make entries in the appropriate output control command         queues.  Commands are queued in separate table entries         corresponding to foreign hosts.  Before output the contents of         the queue are concatenated into a large control message.  The         components of an entry are:            (a)  Host            (b)  Output Control Command Queue      6. The Output Request Queue         This queue contains an entry for each connection which has data         requiring transmission to the net.  There is only one entry per         connection, which is deleted when the last packet of data is         transmitted and is entered whenever a user makes a system         request for data transmission.         The entry is re-inserted if transmission is not completed         (message too long) or is prevented by the flow control         mechanism.  The only component of an entry is a local socket.      7. The Host Live Table         This is a simple table listing the hosts which are alive.  This         table is checked before establishing a connection and before         sending any data to ensure that the destination host actually         exists.  At present the protocol does not define the procedure         to be followed for the Host up/Host down conditions.  See         NWG/RFC#57.      8. The Link Assignment Table         Link numbers are assigned by the receiver.  This table records         which links are free and can, therefore, be assigned.Newkirk, et al.                                                [Page 10]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970VI.  Informal Description of Network Operations   We present here narratives describing the operation conducted during   the three major phases of network usage: opening, flow control, and   closing.   A. Opening      In order to establish a connection for data transmission, a pair      of RFC's must be exchanged.  An RTS must go from the receive-side      to the send-side, and an STR must be issued by the send-side to      the receive-side.  In addition, the receive-side, in its RTS, must      specify a link number.  These RFC's (RFC is a generic term      encompassing RTS and STR) may be issued in any time sequence.  A      provision must also be made for queuing pending calls (i.e., RFC's      which have not been dealt with by the user program).  Thus, when a      user is finished with a connection, he may choose to examine the      next pending call from another process and decide to either accept      or refuse the request for connection.  A problem develops because      the user may not choose to examine his pending calls; thus they      will merely serve to occupy queue space in the NCP.  Several      alternative solutions to this problem will be mentioned later.      Utilizing the framework of the prototype system calls described      above, we envision at least four temporal sequences for obtaining      a successfully opened connection:         1. The user may issue a LISTEN, indicating he is willing to            consider connecting to anyone who sends him an RFC.  When an            RFC comes in the user is notified.  The user then decides            whether he wishes to connect to this socket and issues an            ACCEPT or a CLOSE on the basis of that decision.  A CLOSE '            refuses' the connection, as discussed under "Closing."  An            ACCEPT indicates he is willing to connect; an RFC is issued,            and the connection becomes fully opened.         2. Upon processing a user request for a LISTEN, the NCP            discovers that a pending call exists for that local socket.            The user is immediately notified, and he may ACCEPT or            CLOSE, as above.         3. The user issues a CONNECT, specifying a particular foreign            socket that he would like to connect to.  An RFC is issued.            If the foreign process accepts the request, it answers by            returning an RFC.  When this acknowledging RFC is received,            the connection is opened.Newkirk, et al.                                                [Page 11]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970         4. When presented with a CONNECT, the NCP may discover that a            pending call exists from the specified foreign socket to the            local socket in question.  An acknowledging RFC is issued            and the connection is opened.      In all of the above cases the user is notified when the connection      is opened, but data flow cannot begin until buffer space is      allocated and an ALL command is transmitted.      Any of these connection scenarios will be interrupted if a CLS      comes in, as discussed under "Closing."         1. Pending Call Queues            It is essential that some form of queuing for pending RFC's            be implemented.  A simple way to see this is to examine a            typical LISTEN-CONNECT sequence.  One side issues a LISTEN,            the other a CONNECT.  If the LISTEN is issued before the RFC            coming from the remote CONNECT arrives, all is fine.            However, due to the asynchronous nature of the net, we can            never guarantee that this sequence of events will occur.  If            calls are not queued, and the RFC comes in before the LISTEN            is issued, it will be refused; if it arrives later, it will            be accepted.  Thus we have an extremely ambiguous situation.            Unless one has infinite queue space, it is desirable that            some mechanism for purging the queues of old RFC's which the            user never bothered to examine.  An obvious but informal            method is to note the time when each RFC is entered into the            queue, and then periodically refuse all RFC's which have            exceeded some arbitrary time limit.  Another thought, which            probably should be included within the context of any            scheme, is for the NCP to send a CLS on all outstanding            connections or pending calls when a user logs out or blows            up.            The scheme which is utilized in this description may seem at            first blush to be non-intuitive; but we feel it is more            realistic than other proposals.  Basically, when a CONNECT            is issued, the NCP assumes that this socket wishes to talk            to the specified foreign socket and to that socket only.  It            therefore purges from the pending call queue all non-            matching RFC's by sending back CLS's.  Similarly, when the            connection is in the RFC-SEND state (a CONNECT has been            issued), all non-matching RFC's are refused.  If a LISTEN-            ACCEPT or LISTEN- CLOSE sequence is executed, the remainderNewkirk, et al.                                                [Page 12]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970            of the pending calls are not removed from the queue, in the            expectation that the user may wish to accept these requests            in the future.            Although the latter method may seem to be arbitrary and/or            unnecessarily restrictive, we have not yet concocted a            scenario which would be prohibited by this method, assuming            that we are dealing with a competent programmer (i.e., one            who is wary of race conditions and the asynchronous nature            of the net).  Of course whatever scheme or schemes a            particular site chooses is highly implementation dependent;            we suggest that some provision for the queuing of RFC's be            provided for a period of time at least of the order of            magnitude that they are retained in the CONNECT-clear scheme            mentioned above.   B. Flow Control      Meaningful data can only flow on a connection when it is fully      opened (i.e., two RFC's have been exchanged and closing has not      begun).  We assume that the NCP's have a buffer for receiving      incoming data and that there is some meaningful quantity which      they can advertise (on a per connection basis) indicating the size      message they can handle.  We further assume that the sending side      regulates its transmission according to the advertisements of that      size.      When a connection is opened, a cell (called 'Their Size') is set      to zero.  The receive-side will decide how much space it can      allocate and send an ALL message specifying that space.  The      send-side will increment 'Their Size' by the allocated space and      will then be able to send messages of length less than or equal to      'Their Size' When messages are transmitted, the length of the      message is subtracted from 'Their Size'.  When the receive-side      allocates more buffer space (e.g. when a message is taken by the      user, thus freeing some system buffer space), the number of bits      released is sent to the send-side via an ALL message.      Thus, 'Their Size' is never allowed to become negative and no      transmission can take place if 'Their Size' equals zero.      Notice that the lengths specified in ALL messages are increments      not the absolute size of the receiving buffer.  This is      necessitated  by the full duplex nature of the flow control      protocol.  The length field of the ALL message can be 32 bits long      (note: this is an unsigned integer), thus providing the facility      for essentially an infinite "bit sink", if that may ever be      desired.Newkirk, et al.                                                [Page 13]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970   C. Closing      Just as two RFC's are required to open a connection, two CLS's are      required to close a connection.  Closing occurs under various      circumstances and serves several purposes.  To simplify the      analysis of race conditions, we distinguish four cases: aborting,      refusing, termination by receiver, termination by sender.      A user "aborts" a connection when he issues a CONNECT and then a      CLOSE before the CONNECT is acknowledged.  Typically a user will      abort following an extended wait for the acknowledgment; his      system may also abort for him if he blows up.      A user "refuses" a connection when he issues a LISTEN and, after      being notified of a prospective caller, issues a CLOSE.  Any      requests for connection to a socket which is expecting a call from      a particular socket are also refused.      After a connection is established, either side may terminate.  The      required sequence of events suggests that attempts to CLOSE by the      receive-side should be viewed as "requests" which are always      honored as soon as possible by the send-side.  Any data which has      not yet been passed to the user, or which continues over the      network, is discarded.  Requests to CLOSE by the send-side are      honored as soon as all data transmission is complete.         1. Aborting            We may distinguish three cases:            a) In the simplest case, we send an RFC followed later by a               CLS.  The other side responds with a CLS and the attempt               to connect ends.            b) The foreign process may accept the connection               concurrently with the local process aborting it.  In this               case, the foreign process will believe the local process               is terminating an open connection.            c) The foreign process may refuse the connection               concurrently with the local process aborting it.  In this               case, the foreign process will believe the local process               is acknowledging its refusal.Newkirk, et al.                                                [Page 14]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970         2. Refusing            After an RFC is received, the local host may respond with an            RFC or a CLS, or it may fail to respond.  (The local host            may have already sent its own RFC, etc.)  If the local host            sends a CLS, the local host is said to be "refusing" the            request for connection.            We require that CLS commands be exchanged to close a            connection, so it is necessary for the local host to            maintain the rendezvous table entry until an acknowledging            CLS is returned.         3. Terminating by the Sender            When the user on the send side issues a CLOSE system call,            his NCP must accept it immediately, but may not send out a            CLS command until all the data in the local buffers has been            passed to the foreign host.  It is thus necessary to test            for both 'buffer-empty' and            'RFNM-received' before sending the CLS command.  As usual,            the CLS must be acknowledged before the entry may be            deleted.         4. Terminating by the Receiver            When the user on the receive side issues a CLOSE system            call, his NCP accepts and sends the CLS command immediately.            Data may still arrive, however, and this data should be            discarded.  The send side, upon receiving the CLS, should            immediately terminate the data flow.VII. Connection Status   An excellent mechanism for describing the sequence of events required   to establish and terminate a connection involves a state diagram.  We   may assume that each socket can be associated with a state machine,   and that this state machine may, at any time, be in one of ten   possible states.  In any state, certain network events cause the   connection status to enter another state; other events are ignored;   still others are error.  A transition may also involve the local NCP   performing some action.  Figure 7.1 depicts the state machine.   Circles [now boxes: Ed] represent states (described below); arrows   show legal transitions between states.  The labels on the arrows   identify the event which caused them (note that CLOSE is a system   call, CLS is a control command).  Phrases after slashes denote the   action which should  be performed while traveling over that arrow.   The arrow labeled '[E]RFC' (found between states 0 and 1) representsNewkirk, et al.                                                [Page 15]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970   the condition that whenever a connection enters the CLOSED state, the   pending call queue for that connection is checked [Original was   backwards "E": Ed.]   If any pending calls exist in the queue, the connection moves to the   PENDING state.  If an RFC is received for a socket in the CLOSED   state, it is also moved along this path to the PENDING state.  Events   and the actions they cause are described in sections VIII and IX   below.  Descriptions of the ten states follow:      (0) CLOSED          The local socket is not attached to any port and no user has          requested a connection with it.  (The table entry is non-          existent).      (1) PENDING CALL          The socket is not attached to any port but one or more          requests for connection have been received.  A LISTEN system          call will be satisfied immediately by the first entry in the          pending call queue for a matching request; all other pending          calls are deleted.      (2) LISTENING          The socket is attached to a port.  We are waiting for a user          to request connection with this socket.      (3) RFC-RCVD          We are listening and an RFC was received.  The local user has          been informed of the pending call.  He must respond with          either a CLOSE or an ACCEPT.      (4) ABORT          We have notified the user that his LISTEN has been satisfied          but he has not yet responded; if during this time the foreign          user aborts the connection by sending a CLS, we send a CLS to          acknowledge the abort and mark the fact with this state.  When          the user accepts or refuses the call, we can inform him the          connection has been prematurely terminated.Newkirk, et al.                                                [Page 16]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970      (5) RFC-SENT          This state is entered when:          a)  The local user has attached this socket to a port by              issuing a CONNECT.          b)  An RFC has been sent, and          c)  No reply has been received.          When the user issues a CONNECT the pending call queue is          searched.          If a matching RFC is not found, the queue is deleted and this          state is entered.  As new RFC's arrive they are compared with          our user's request.  If they do not match, the RFC is          immediately refused.  If the RFC matches, it completes the          initialization process and the connection enters the OPEN          state.      (6) OPEN          RFC's have been exchanged and the connection is securely          established.  Transmission may begin following receipt of an          ALL command from the receive side, and will then proceed          subject to flow control.      (7) CLS-WAIT          After the local user has executed a CLOSE, and we have issued          a CLS, we must wait for an acknowledging CLS before the          connection can be completely closed.   If the appropriate CLS          has not already been received, this state is entered.      (8) DATA-WAIT          If we are on the send side and the local user executes a CLOSE          system call, a CLS cannot be issued if our data buffer is not          empty or if a RFNM for the last data message is outstanding.          The connection enters this state to wait for these conditions          to be fulfilled.  Upon completion and acknowledgement of          output a CLS may be issued and the connection enters the CLS-          WAIT state, waiting for the acknowledging CLS.   If a CLS          arrives while in the DATA-WAIT state we clear our buffer (the          CLS came from a receive socket, indicating it is no longer          interested in our data) and enter the RFNM-WAIT state to wait          for the network to clear.Newkirk, et al.                                                [Page 17]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970      (9) RFNM-WAIT          If we are on the send side and a CLS command arrives, we          cannot issue an acknowledging CLS if we have not received the          RFNM for our last data message.  We enter this state to await          the RFNM, and cease all further data transmission.  When the          RFNM comes in, a CLS may then be issued, and the connection          will be closed.Newkirk, et al.                                                [Page 18]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970                      ______________                     |              |       CLOSE      CONN/          |    CLOSED    |<---------------------------+      send RFC       |     (0)      |       LISTEN               |    +----------------|              |-----------------------+    |    |                |______________|                       |    |    |                     |    ^                            |    |    |              [E]RFC |    |  CLS/send CLS              |    |    |                  ___V____|____                     ___V____|____    |  non-matching   |             |                   |             |    |  CONN/send RFC  |   PENDING   | LISTEN        RFC |  LISTENING  |    |   +-------------|    (1)      |----------+   +----|     (2)     |    |   |             |_____________|          |   |    |_____________|    |   |       matching     |                 |   | ___V___V_____  CONN/send RFC|               __V___V______|             |              |     ACCEPT/  |             | CLS/|   RFC-SENT  | RFC          |     send RFC |   RFC-RECD  | send CLS|     (5)     |----------+   |   +----------|     (3)     |---------+|_____________|          |   |   |          |_____________|         |   |   |                 |   |   |               |                  |   |   |              ___V___V___V___  SND&CLOSE |   ____________   |   |   |    RCV&CLS/ |               |-----------)->|            |  |   |   |    send CLS |      OPEN     | SND&CLS   |  |  DATA-WAIT |  |   |   |   +---------|      (6)      |--------+  |  |    (8)     |  |   |   |   |         |_______________|        |  |  |____________|  |   |   |   |      RCV&CLOSE/ |                |  |   |              |   |   |   |       send CLS  |                |  |   |              |   |   |   |                 |                |  |   | CLS          |   |   |   |           ______V______          |  |   |              |   |   |   |   CLOSE/ |             |CLOSE/   |  |   |              |   |   |   |  send CLS|   CLS-WAIT  |send CLS |  |   |              |   |   +---)--------->|     (8)     |<--------)--+   |              |   |       |          |_____________|         |      |              |   |       |                 |             ___V______V_       ______V___   |       |                 |            |            |     |          |   |       |                 |            |  RFNM-WAIT |     |   ABORT  |   |       |             CLS |            |     (9)    |     |    (4)   |   |       |                 |            |____________|     |__________|   |       |                 |                   |                 |   |       |           ______V_______  RFNM/     |                 |   |       |          |              | send CLS  |                 |   |  CLS/ +--------->|    CLOSED    |<----------+                 |   | send CLS         |     (0)      |                ACCEPT|CLOSE |   +----------------->|              |<----------------------------+                      |______________|                         Figure 7.1                  Connection State DiagramNewkirk, et al.                                                [Page 19]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970VIII.  Algorithms for the Input Interpreter   The following is a concise description of the NCP's responses to   incoming network commands.  CS always indicates Connection State.   Note, CLOSE is a system call executed by the local user process, and   CLS is a network command.   NOP      Discard.   RFC (RTS or STR)      If no entry exists, create one with status = PENDING CALL, and      queue the message.      If CS = LISTENING, then queue the entry, enter the RFC-RCVD state,      and inform the user of the request.      If CS = RFC-SENT but the new RFC does not match the request,      refuse the RFC.      In all other cases, check the RFC for a match.  If none exists,      queue the RFC.  If the RFC matches, then if:         CS = RFC-SENT, we enter the OPEN state.         CS = CLOSE-WAIT, the RFC is ignored.         otherwise, the request is illegal in all states which indicate         it has already been received (these states are 1,3,4,6,8,9).      In any case, if processing the RFC causes an overflow condition      (resources are exhausted), refuse the connection (send a CLS).   CLS      The pending call queue is searched.  If the CLS doesn't match the      current request, but does match some other request, then delete      that request and issue a CLS.  If there is no match, the CLS is      ignored.      If the CLS matches the current request, and CS =         PENDING, then delete the current request.  If the request queue            is empty, delete the entry; otherwise, leave the entry            alone.Newkirk, et al.                                                [Page 20]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970         RFC-RCVD, Issue a CLS and enter the ABORT state.         ABORT, ignore.         RFC-SENT, issue a CLS.  If the pending call queue is empty            delete the entry, else enter the PENDING state.         OPEN, If we are on the receive side, response is identical to            the response for RFC-SENT.  If we are on the send side,            clear the data queue, and if a RFNM is still pending enter            the RFNM-WAIT state.  Otherwise response is identical to the            response for RFC-SENT.         CLS-WAIT, Issue a CLS and if the pending call queue is empty,            delete the entry, otherwise CS = PENDING.         DATA-WAIT, clear the data queue and enter the RFNM-WAIT state.            A matching CLS cannot occur in the CLOSED or LISTENING            states.   ERR      Errors are queued for later attention by system programmers, and      are considered to be a system error in the host that originated      the exchange.  (Not associated with any state).   ECO      The op code is changed to ERP and retransmitted (Not associated      with any state).   ERP      Upon receipt of an ERP, the system passes the text of the command      back to the process which issued the ECO.   INR, INS      These commands are enabled only in the OPEN state.  Upon receiving      an INTERRUPT, the system causes an event to be sent to the      associated process.  An INTERRUPT is ignored in the CLS-WAIT,      DATA-WAIT, and RFNM-WAIT states.  In any other state it is an      error.Newkirk, et al.                                                [Page 21]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970   ALL      ALLOCATE is valid only in the OPEN state, and may be sent only to      a send socket.  The NCP increments the 'Their Size' field in the      associated rendezvous table entry by the size specified in the      ALLOCATE command.      In the CLS-WAIT and DATA-WAIT states this command is ignored; in      any other state it is an error.   Data-RFNM      If in the OPEN state, mark the Flow Control Status field in the         appropriate rendezvous table entry as RFNM-RECVD, and send more         data if required.      If in the DATA-WAIT state, maintenance the Flow Control Status.         If the data queue is empty issue a CLS and enter the CLS-WAIT         state; otherwise, transmit the next message.      If in the RFNM-WAIT state, maintenance the Flow Control Status and         issue a CLS.  If the Pending Call queue is empty delete the         rendezvous table entry, otherwise CS = PENDING.      A Data-RFNM is an error in all other states.IX.  Algorithms for the System Call Interpreter   Each System Call is discussed, giving the state changes it may   effect:   CONNECT      If there is no entry, create one, issue an RFC, and enter the         RFC-SENT state.      If CS = PENDING, search the queue and reject all non-matching         requests.  If no match is found issue an RFC and enter the         RFC-SENT state.  If a match is found, issue an RFC and enter         the OPEN state.  Transmission can commence as soon as buffer         space has been allocated.      In any other state this command is illegal.   LISTEN      If an entry doesn't exist, create one, and enter the LISTENING         state.Newkirk, et al.                                                [Page 22]

RFC 55             Prototypical Implementation of NCP          June 1970      If CS = PENDING, inform the user and enter the RFC-RCVD state.      In any other state this command is illegal.   ACCEPT      If CS = RFC-RCVD, then issue an RFC and enter the OPEN state.         Data transmission can occur as soon as buffer space is         allocated.      If CS = ABORT, inform the user of the premature termination of the         connection.  If the pending call queue is empty, delete the         entry; otherwise, enter the PENDING state.      This command cannot be legally executed in any other state.   CLOSE         If CS =      LISTENING, then delete the entry.      RFC-RCVD, then issue a CLS and enter the CLS-WAIT state.      ABORT, inform the user of the premature termination of the         connection.  If the pending call queue is empty, delete the         entry; otherwise, enter the PENDING state.      RFC-SENT, then issue a CLS and enter the CLS-WAIT state.      OPEN, if we are on the send side, and the data queue is not empty,         or if a Data-RFNM is still outstanding, enter the DATA-WAIT         state; otherwise, issue a CLS and enter the CLS-WAIT state.      CLS-WAIT, issuing a CLOSE in this state is a USER ERROR.      DATA-WAIT, issuing a CLOSE in this state is also an illegal         sequence.      RFNM-WAIT, ignore the CLOSE.      A valid CLOSE cannot be issued if an entry does not exist, or if a         socket is in the PENDING state.           [ This RFC was put into machine readable form for entry   ]           [ into the online RFC archives by Anthony Anderberg 5/00 ]Newkirk, et al.                                                [Page 23]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2026 Movatter.jp