Early Internet & RPC - Revision history

Rhooper: /* Pros */ - fix remove -> remote

2008-04-16T00:33:42Z

Pros: - fix remove -> remote

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:33, 16 April 2008
Line 37:		Line 37:
	===Pros===		===Pros===
	# Easy to use		# Easy to use
	#* makes ~~remove~~ procedure calls look like local calls		#* makes remote procedure calls look like local calls
	#* local is easy		#* local is easy
	#* therefore ~~remove~~ is easy with RPC - good!		#* therefore remote is easy with RPC - good!
	# (Counter to first con) Use standards, problem goes away		# (Counter to first con) Use standards, problem goes away
	# Easy to debug		# Easy to debug

Soma: /* Debate */

2008-01-17T05:12:39Z

Debate

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:12, 17 January 2008
Line 64:		Line 64:
	# Too much to set up for simple applications		# Too much to set up for simple applications
	# Less flexible		# Less flexible

			===Anil's Comments===

			RPC makes the simple things very easy, but it doesn't help with the big challenges of distributed programming: robustness and security. If those factors are of minimal importance (e.g. you are programming an isolated cluster running a very high-performance application), then this trade-off doesn't matter. However, there exist other distributed programming paradigms that are easy to use but that still distinguish between accessing internal functions and communicating with external entities.

			If we can keep the developer aware of when communication occurs, then there is a chance that developer will remember to do the input validation and error checking at those points, which is what is needed to make robust and secure applications.

Soma: /* Class Discussion */

2008-01-17T05:04:19Z

Class Discussion

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:04, 17 January 2008
Line 32:		Line 32:
	==Presentations==		==Presentations==

	==~~Class Discussion~~==		==Debate==
			Debate about the pros and cons of RPC. Topic: RPCs are the right foundation for the distributed applications (on today's Internet).

			===Pros===
			# Easy to use
			#* makes remove procedure calls look like local calls
			#* local is easy
			#* therefore remove is easy with RPC - good!
			# (Counter to first con) Use standards, problem goes away
			# Easy to debug
			# Avoids complexity of protocol design
			# RPC can be abstracted from the protocol design
			# (Counter to fourth con) Use threads for interactivity. Manage complexity by doing things pairwise.
			# (Counter to fifth con) - wrong!
			# (Counter to seventh con) - Use standards (ORBs in CORBA, etc.) for authentication
			# (Counter to eighth con) - But you specify the API
			# (Counter to ninth con) - It's the same with other methods. But RPC makes it easier to do.

			===Cons===
			# Language/implementation specific
			# (Counter to third pro) Not easy to debug. example: NullPointerException thrown on server, containing line of erroneous code running on the server.
			# Counter to fifth pro) But there is more overhead - slower
			# Synchronous - wrong model for large, distributed applications, and also bad for users
			# Limited scalability - hard to do well
			# Limited control of communication details
			# Authentication is opaque
			# Larger attack surface area
			# Poor match to listening (hard for server to communicate information back to client)
			# Backwards compatibility is difficult
			# RPC is not a "natural" interaction style - message passing is more similar to human communication
			# Too much to set up for simple applications
			# Less flexible

Soma: /* Questions to be discussed */

2008-01-11T21:15:22Z

Questions to be discussed

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:15, 11 January 2008
Line 23:		Line 23:
	==Questions to be discussed==		==Questions to be discussed==

	1. What did the (technical) world look like when this paper was		# What did the (technical) world look like when this paper was published?
	published?		# What is the paper about? What are the key ideas?
	2. What is the paper about? What are the key ideas?		# What is the basic argument of the paper, and what sort of evidence is used to make the argument?
	3. What is the basic argument of the paper, and what sort of evidence		# To what extent do you "believe" the argument? Why?
	is used to make the argument?		# What did the authors get right about the future? What did they miss about the future?
	4. To what extent do you "believe" the argument? Why?		# What has been forgotten since this paper?
	5. What did the authors get right about the future?
	What did they miss about the future?
	6. What has been forgotten since this paper?

	==Presentations==		==Presentations==

	==Class Discussion==		==Class Discussion==

Soma: /* Readings */

2008-01-11T21:14:01Z

Readings

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:14, 11 January 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	==Readings==		==Readings==

	kahn1972-resource.pdf		*'''[http://www.scs.carleton.ca/~soma/distos/2008-01-14/kahn1972-resource.pdf Robert E. Kahn, "Resource-Sharing Computer Communications Networks" (1972)]:'''
	~~This is one of the early papers describing the rationale behind the~~
	~~ARPANET (which later evolved into the Internet)~~. ~~For more~~
	~~background on the ARPANET~~, ~~see this video~~ (~~optional~~):

	~~Computer Networks - The Heralds~~ of ~~Resource Sharing~~		This is one of the early papers describing the rationale behind the
	http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4989933629762859961		ARPANET (which later evolved into the Internet). For more
			background on the ARPANET, see [http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4989933629762859961 Computer Networks - The Heralds of Resource Sharing] (optional).

			Note how both the ARPANET and and standard operating systems were
			developed to facilitate resource sharing.

	~~Note how both the ARPANET and and standard operating systems were~~		*'''[http://www.scs.carleton.ca/~soma/distos/2008-01-14/nelson1981-rpc.pdf Bruce J. Nelson, ''Remote Procedure Call'' (1981)]:'''
	~~developed to facilitate resource sharing~~.

	~~nelson1981-rpc.pdf~~		You only need to read the thesis summary which starts at page 224 in
	You only need to read the thesis summary which starts at page 224 in		the PDF. If you have time, however, I'd suggest looking at the
	the PDF. If you have time, however, I'd suggest looking at the		rest, particularly the introduction and related work.
	rest, particularly the introduction and related work.

	birrell1984-rpcimpl.pdf		*'''[http://www.scs.carleton.ca/~soma/distos/2008-01-14/birrell1984-rpcimpl.pdf Birrell & Nelson, "Implementing Remote Procedure Calls" (1984)]'''
	Compare the perspective of this RPC implementation description with
	the more design-oriented focus of Nelson's thesis.		Compare the perspective of this RPC implementation description with
			the more design-oriented focus of Nelson's thesis.

	==Questions to be discussed==		==Questions to be discussed==

Soma at 19:13, 11 January 2008

2008-01-11T19:13:12Z

New page

==Readings==

kahn1972-resource.pdf
This is one of the early papers describing the rationale behind the
ARPANET (which later evolved into the Internet). For more
background on the ARPANET, see this video (optional):

Computer Networks - The Heralds of Resource Sharing
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4989933629762859961

Note how both the ARPANET and and standard operating systems were
developed to facilitate resource sharing.

nelson1981-rpc.pdf
You only need to read the thesis summary which starts at page 224 in
the PDF. If you have time, however, I'd suggest looking at the
rest, particularly the introduction and related work.

birrell1984-rpcimpl.pdf
Compare the perspective of this RPC implementation description with
the more design-oriented focus of Nelson's thesis.

==Questions to be discussed==

1. What did the (technical) world look like when this paper was
published?
2. What is the paper about? What are the key ideas?
3. What is the basic argument of the paper, and what sort of evidence
is used to make the argument?
4. To what extent do you "believe" the argument? Why?
5. What did the authors get right about the future?
What did they miss about the future?
6. What has been forgotten since this paper?

==Presentations==

==Class Discussion==