[rfc-i] I need your "good" RFCs
touch at strayalpha.com
Tue Feb 16 14:36:25 PST 2021
> On Feb 16, 2021, at 1:31 AM, tom petch <daedulus at btconnect.com> wrote:
> I said earlier that TCP and the trio of SNMPv1 RFC were high on my list. I think it worthwhile to say what are not, and top of that list would be the original, core specifications of IPv6.
There are many on my list to avoid - starting, first and foremost, those that acceded to the directive of “no API in a protocol spec”.
A protocol spec without an (abstract) API isn’t a protocol spec.
In my courseware (for intro to nets), I define a protocol spec as a finite state machine (FSM) as follows:
- list of states
- set of upper layer inputs/outputs (the abstract API)
- set of messages transmitted/received (the “on the wire” format)
- set of timers to be set or trigger
- a table that maps every input (API input, message receipt, and/or timer trigger) and state combination to a new state and set of outputs (API output, message sent, and/or timer set)
PS - “protocol spec as FSM" isn’t merely a convenience or convention. It’s fundamental, based on what you get when you take a Turing machine and connect it to a communication channel, i.e., a FSM is a Turing machine that can’t “un-send” its outputs.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rfc-interest