End-to-end arguments in system design by J.H. Saltzer, D.P. Reed and D.D. Clark [1] presents a design principle called end-to-end argument, which proposes that functions that were usually developed at low levels modules in a distributed system should be excluded from those modules. Instead, it recommends that these functions should be placed on the higher level modules, closer to the application that uses the function, in order to provide the essential functionality. It also states that when a module consists of low level functions, there are instances that it may not be able to execute the functionality as what the higher level application requires to do. But on the other hand, there are cases that low level functions provide better efficiency and performance. Thus, this principle should not be treated as an absolute but as a valuable guide for placing functionality in a communication system.
The end to end arguments are a set of design principles on how the Internet has been designed [2]. But due to the expansion of Internet, from individual to commercialization purpose, there is a rising threat of rethinking the Internet's original design principles. Few numbers of new requirements have emerged for the Internet and its applications and these will be fulfilled through the addition of new mechanism in the core of the network.
While multiple forces seem to support the alteration within the Internet mechanism that may be inconsistent with the end to end arguments, we can’t refute the contribution of end to end arguments in the preservation of flexibility and openness of the Internet. They also allow new applications to be developed. End to end implementations are supported by the need to ensure appropriate service, and to facilitate network transparency, and decentralism. Consequently, the simplicity of placing certain functionality to lower-level modules is applicable to certain service and can have an impact in terms of its performance.
References:
[1] J. H. Saltzer, D.P. Reed and D. D. Clark, "End-to-end arguments in system design," ACM Transactions in Computer Systems, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 277-288, November 1984.
[2] M. S. Blumenthal and D. D. Clark, "Rethinking the design of the Internet: The end to end arguments vs. the brave new world," ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 70-109, August 2001.
The end to end arguments are a set of design principles on how the Internet has been designed [2]. But due to the expansion of Internet, from individual to commercialization purpose, there is a rising threat of rethinking the Internet's original design principles. Few numbers of new requirements have emerged for the Internet and its applications and these will be fulfilled through the addition of new mechanism in the core of the network.
While multiple forces seem to support the alteration within the Internet mechanism that may be inconsistent with the end to end arguments, we can’t refute the contribution of end to end arguments in the preservation of flexibility and openness of the Internet. They also allow new applications to be developed. End to end implementations are supported by the need to ensure appropriate service, and to facilitate network transparency, and decentralism. Consequently, the simplicity of placing certain functionality to lower-level modules is applicable to certain service and can have an impact in terms of its performance.
References:
[1] J. H. Saltzer, D.P. Reed and D. D. Clark, "End-to-end arguments in system design," ACM Transactions in Computer Systems, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 277-288, November 1984.
[2] M. S. Blumenthal and D. D. Clark, "Rethinking the design of the Internet: The end to end arguments vs. the brave new world," ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 70-109, August 2001.
No comments:
Post a Comment