blank.gif (43 bytes)

Church Of The
Swimming Elephant

Search:
1.1.4 Embedded Gateway Code Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
1.1.4 Embedded Gateway Code

Up: Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
Up: Requests For Comments
Up: RFC 1122
Up: 1. INTRODUCTION
Up: 1.1 The Internet Architecture
Prev: 1.1.3 Internet Protocol Suite
Next: 1.2 General Considerations

1.1.4 Embedded Gateway Code

1.1.4 Embedded Gateway Code

Some Internet host software includes embedded gateway functionality, so that these hosts can forward packets as a gateway would, while still performing the application layer functions of a host.

Such dual-purpose systems must follow the Gateway Requirements RFC [INTRO:2] with respect to their gateway functions, and must follow the present document with respect to their host functions. In all overlapping cases, the two specifications should be in agreement.

There are varying opinions in the Internet community about embedded gateway functionality. The main arguments are as follows:

  • Pro: in a local network environment where networking is informal, or in isolated internets, it may be convenient and economical to use existing host systems as gateways.

    There is also an architectural argument for embedded gateway functionality: multihoming is much more common than originally foreseen, and multihoming forces a host to make routing decisions as if it were a gateway. If the multihomed host contains an embedded gateway, it will have full routing knowledge and as a result will be able to make more optimal routing decisions.

  • Con: Gateway algorithms and protocols are still changing, and they will continue to change as the Internet system grows larger. Attempting to include a general gateway function within the host IP layer will force host system maintainers to track these (more frequent) changes. Also, a larger pool of gateway implementations will make coordinating the changes more difficult. Finally, the complexity of a gateway IP layer is somewhat greater than that of a host, making the implementation and operation tasks more complex.

    In addition, the style of operation of some hosts is not appropriate for providing stable and robust gateway service.

There is considerable merit in both of these viewpoints. One conclusion can be drawn: an host administrator must have conscious control over whether or not a given host acts as a gateway. See Section 3.1 for the detailed requirements.


Next: 1.2 General Considerations

Connected: An Internet Encyclopedia
1.1.4 Embedded Gateway Code

Cotse.Net

Protect yourself from cyberstalkers, identity thieves, and those who would snoop on you.
Stop spam from invading your inbox without losing the mail you want. We give you more control over your e-mail than any other service.
Block popups, ads, and malicious scripts while you surf the net through our anonymous proxies.
Participate in Usenet, host your web files, easily send anonymous messages, and more, much more.
All private, all encrypted, all secure, all in an easy to use service, and all for only $5.95 a month!

Service Details

 
.
www.cotse.com
Have you gone to church today?
.
All pages ©1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 Church of the Swimming Elephant unless otherwise stated
Church of the Swimming Elephant©1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003 Cotse.com.
Cotse.com is a wholly owned subsidiary of Packetderm, LLC.

Packetderm, LLC
210 Park Ave #308
Worcester, MA 01609