Re: Protocol Definition

pankaj kumar <se.pankaj@gmail.com> Mon, 09 January 2012 14:30 UTC

Return-Path: <se.pankaj@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCA5821F8772 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 06:30:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.932
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.932 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1PwJ2rN05S1t for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 06:30:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qw0-f51.google.com (mail-qw0-f51.google.com [209.85.216.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CDED721F8751 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 06:30:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by qadz3 with SMTP id z3so2195570qad.10 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 06:30:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=X/QAuwJJeJl1Fu4VsKGO7mKTlmiOJUF8SGxNmcKt7zU=; b=Ibya1lYtcVoxMVpZq3U5MaQzXER7Hrt+d6YOPgRoWfkt3Cs0GF/ZakaC1gNc1dLeIW +6u42GLX8fJUazvsp2hnneVmCV236rG/5UCiR0eY1D+EKg7OXdJneGyAPCD5lCiZIjHc FYz0pw4nnsNmO51uzsI9dzyZPSSdP+rQo6tbg=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.224.203.67 with SMTP id fh3mr19935153qab.13.1326119441306; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 06:30:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.229.160.12 with HTTP; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 06:30:41 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4F0A1AE4.3050306@250bpm.com>
References: <CAD7Ssm-Vetqmh3sxMWRiOHysp+XUaas7XuBkeg803mkTCsA0vQ@mail.gmail.com> <3013.1325775717.451646@puncture> <4F05DA49.8050802@dcrocker.net> <4F05E3B8.5030305@mail-abuse.org> <3013.1325799709.099423@puncture> <4F06647E.2010905@dcrocker.net> <4F06662A.6070504@joelhalpern.com> <4F0667B9.30604@dcrocker.net> <000b01cccddb$fd4214c0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <a06240871cb2f30d9735f@10.0.1.26> <4F0A1AE4.3050306@250bpm.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 20:00:41 +0530
Message-ID: <CAPxybD7HaHYoxOkL3T1YQO80Vie=dWc409Q_rGrr6E1ZpC_PNA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Protocol Definition
From: pankaj kumar <se.pankaj@gmail.com>
To: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@250bpm.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="20cf300fb08d3a933704b6193e10"
Cc: IETF-Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, dcrocker@bbiw.net
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 09 Jan 2012 14:30:45 -0000

What I feel that protocol is rules for any mode of communication or for
exchange of data.
e.g. - People speaks in English and English grammar is kind of protocol
otherwise it is difficult to understand communication if sentences are not
properly as per grammar. Now you can have a point that even we can
understand semantic of the sentence even if it is not correct as per
grammar; it is because we are human being and we can understand by guessing
intelligence. But it is difficult/impossible in networking to transfer data
without protocol because at every received byte or every received chunk of
bytes you can not have artificial intelligence to decode the received data.

other example: you have some rules to play every games- rules in chess,
football, tennis etc.

In this way I understand protocol is must and needed set of rules in every
communication (networking  or in-human) special to make it is successful.

Otherwise without protocol, things will be left on wild guess or on sixth
sense of the system.


On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:08 AM, Martin Sustrik <sustrik@250bpm.com> wrote:

> On 08/01/12 13:00, John Day wrote:
>
>  You are also correct that strictly speaking the words "protocol" and
>> "algorithm" are probably the same.
>>
>
> That is an interesting point.
>
> What I encounter often is the belief that protocol is just "description of
> bytes on the wire". People often forget about the stuff that cannot be seen
> on the wire (e.g. TCP state machine).
>
> The area I work in has little or no special "bytes on wire" (simple
> message-based underlying transport is sufficient) but a lot of algorithmic
> stuff. Consequently, it was often dismissed as not being a protocol.
>
> Martin
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/ietf<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>
>



-- 
Thanks & Regards,

Pankaj Kumar,

Mobile: +91 8939008891
http://in.linkedin.com/in/techiepankaj