Browse Prior Art Database

Logical Message Synchronization (RFC0058) Disclosure Number: IPCOM000003662D
Original Publication Date: 1970-Jun-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2019-Feb-11
Document File: 2 page(s) / 3K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

T.P. Skinner: AUTHOR

Related Documents

10.17487/RFC0058: DOI

This text was extracted from a PDF file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 56% of the total text.

Network Working Group T. P. Skinner Request for Comments: 58 MIT Project MAC June 1970

Logical Message Synchronization

At the last network meeting, the question of logical and physical message distinctions was raised. An argument was made in favor of never running two logical messages together as one or more physical messages. Another method of stating this is that a logical message must begin on a physical message boundary. This did not, however, solve the problem of locating the end of a logical message. A rather poor technique was suggested by myself which consisted of using the first partial physical message as an indication of the last physical message of the logical message. This technique was thrown out for a number of very valid reasons. The solution that seemed most pleasing was the inclusion of some sort of a bit count or data type specification to precede the logical message. Most everyone seemed to like this even though it was stated in a very general way.

As of this writing it appears that it is desired to completely sever the relation between physical and logical messages. This certainly is aesthetically pleasing. However, we are now forced to view the network as a virtually infinite bit stream with no physical delineations. It may well do to transmit a logical header and bit count for each message as long as there are no errors along the line. If, however, a bit is dropped, the problem of synchronization is compounded by the fact that we have no ability to search for the beginning of a logical message other than brute force. An error of this type could be introduced by faulty host or user software/hardware as well as the imp itself. This would involve the shifting of the message bit by bit and seeing if the data looked reasonable. This could certainly be time-consuming as well as introducing the possibility of false synchronism.

I can think of several...