Network Working Group                                       Trudy Miller
Request for Comments: 938                                            ACC
                                                          February 1985

                Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol
                Functional and Interface Specification


STATUS OF THIS MEMO

  This RFC is being distributed to members of the DARPA research
  community in order to solicit their reactions to the proposals
  contained in it.  While the issues discussed may not be directly
  relevant to the research problems of the DARPA community, they may be
  interesting to a number of researchers and implementors.  This RFC
  suggests a proposed protocol for the ARPA-Internet community, and
  requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.  Distribution
  of this memo is unlimited.

ABSTRACT

  The Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol (IRTP) is a transport
  level host to host protocol designed for an internet environment.  It
  provides reliable, sequenced delivery of packets of data between
  hosts and multiplexes/demultiplexes streams of packets from/to user
  processes representing ports.  It is simple to implement, with a
  minimum of connection management, at the possible expense of
  efficiency.

























Miller                                                          [Page i]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


TABLE OF CONTENTS

  INTRODUCTION

     1.1   Purpose .........................................  1
     1.2   Underlying Mechanisms ...........................  1
     1.3   Relationship to Other Protocols .................  2

  IRTP HEADERS

     2.1   Header Format ...................................  3
     2.2   Packet Type .....................................  3
     2.3   Port Number .....................................  3
     2.4   Sequence Number .................................  4
     2.5   Length ..........................................  4
     2.6   Checksum ........................................  4

  INTERFACES

     3.1   User Services Provided By IRTP ..................  5
     3.2   IP Services Expected by IRTP ....................  5

  MODEL OF OPERATION

     4.1   State Variables .................................  6
     4.2   IRTP Initialization .............................  7
     4.3   Host-to-Host Synchronization ....................  7
     4.3.1   Response to SYNCH Packets .....................  7
     4.3.2   Response to SYNCH ACK Packet ..................  8
     4.4   Transmitting Data ...............................  8
     4.4.1   Receiving Data From Using Processes ...........  8
     4.4.2   Packet Retransmission ......................... 10
     4.5   Receiving Data .................................. 10
     4.5.1   Receive and Acknowledgment Windows ............ 11
     4.5.2   Invalid Packets ............................... 12
     4.5.3   Sequence Numbers Within Acknowledge Window .... 12
     4.5.4   Sequence Numbers Within the Receive Window .... 12
     4.5.5   Forwarding Data to Using Processes ............ 13

  IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES

     5.1   Retransmission Strategies ....................... 14
     5.2   Pinging ......................................... 14
     5.3   Deleting Connection Tables ...................... 16





Miller                                                         [Page ii]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


  LIST OF FIGURES

     Figure 1-1    Relationship of IRTP to Other Protocols .  2
     Figure 2-1    IRTP Header Format ......................  3
     Figure 4-1    SYNCH Packet Format .....................  8
     Figure 4-2    SYNCH ACK Packet Format .................  8
     Figure 4-3    DATA Packet Format ......................  9
     Figure 4-4    DATA ACK Packet Format .................. 11
     Figure 4-5    PORT NAK Packet Format .................. 11

  ABBREVIATIONS

     ICMP        Internet Control Message Protocol
     IP          Internet Protocol
     IRTP        Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol
     RDP         Reliable Data Protocol
     TCP         Transmission Control Protocol
     UDP         User Datagram Protocol































Miller                                                        [Page iii]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


CHAPTER 1 - INTRODUCTION

  The Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol (IRTP) is a full duplex,
  transaction oriented, host to host protocol which provides reliable
  sequenced delivery of packets of data, called transaction packets.

  Note: throughout this document the terms host and internet address
  are used interchangeably.

  1.1 Purpose

     The IRTP was designed for an environment in which one host will
     have to maintain reliable communication with many other hosts.  It
     is assumed that there is a (relatively) sporadic flow of
     information with each destination host, however information flow
     may be initiated at any time at either end of the connection.  The
     nature of the information is in the form of transactions, i.e.
     small, self contained messages.  There may be times at which one
     host will want to communicate essentially the same information to
     all of its known destinations as rapidly as possible.

     In effect, the IRTP defines a constant underlying connection
     between two hosts. This connection is not established and broken
     down, rather it can be resynchronized with minimal loss of data
     whenever one of the hosts has been rebooted.

     Due to the lack of connection management, it is desirable that all
     IRTP processes keep static information about all possible remote
     hosts. However, the IRTP has been designed such that minimal state
     information needs to be associated with each host to host pair,
     thereby allowing one host to communicate with many remote hosts.

     The IRTP is more complex than UDP in that it provides reliable,
     sequenced delivery of packets, but it is less complex than TCP in
     that sequencing is done on a packet by packet (rather than
     character stream) basis, and there is only one connection defined
     between any two internet addresses (that is, it is not a process
     to process protocol.)

  1.2 Underlying Mechanisms

     The IRTP uses retransmission and acknowledgments to guarantee
     delivery. Checksums are used to guarantee data integrity and to
     protect against misrouting.  There is a host to host
     synchronization mechanism and packet sequencing to provide
     duplicate detection and ordered delivery to the user process.  A
     simple mechanism allows IRTP to multiplex and demultiplex streams


Miller                                                          [Page 1]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


     of transaction packets being exchanged between multiple IRTP users
     on this host and statically paired IRTP users on the same remote
     host.

  1.3 Relationship to Other Protocols

     The IRTP is designed for use in a potentially lossy internet
     environment.  It requires that IP be under it.  The IP protocol
     number of IRTP is 28.

     Conversely, IRTP provides a reliable transport protocol for one or
     more user processes.  User processes must have well-known IRTP
     port numbers, and can communicate only with matching processes
     with the same port number.  (Note that the term port refers to a
     higher level protocol.  IRTP connections exists between two hosts,
     not between a host/port and another host/port.)

     These relationships are depicted below.

        +--------+    +--------+   +-----------+
        | port a |....| port x |   | TCP users |   Application Level
        +--------+    +--------+   +-----------+
              |          |            | ... |
            +--------------+       +-----------+
            |     IRTP     |       |    TCP    |   Host Level
            +--------------+       +-----------+
                   |                     |
        +--------------------------------------+
        |    Internet Protocol and ICMP        |   Internet Level
        +--------------------------------------+
                         |
        +--------------------------------------+
        |      Local Network Protocol          |   Network Level
        +--------------------------------------+

        Figure 1-1.  Relationship of IRTP to Other Protocols













Miller                                                          [Page 2]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


CHAPTER 2 - IRTP HEADERS

  2.1 Header Format

     Each IRTP packet is preceded by an eight byte header depicted
     below. The individual fields are described in the following
     sections.

        0      7 8     15 16             31
        +--------+--------+--------+--------+
        | packet |  port  |     sequence    |
        |  type  | number |      number     |
        +--------+--------+--------+--------+
        |      length     |    checksum     |
        |                 |                 |
        +-----------------+-----------------+
        |                                   |
        |       optional data octets        |
        + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |

        Figure 2-1.  IRTP Header Format

  2.2 Packet Type

     Five packet types are defined by the IRTP. These are:

     packet type   numeric code

     SYNCH              0
     SYNCH ACK          1
     DATA               2
     DATA ACK           3
     PORT NAK           4

     The use of individual packet types is discussed in MODEL OF
     OPERATION.

  2.3 Port Number

     This field is used for the multiplexing and demultiplexing of
     packets from multiple user processes across a single IRTP
     connection.  Processes which desire to use IRTP must claim port
     numbers.  A port number represents a higher level protocol, and
     data to/from this port may be exchanged only with a process which
     has claimed the same port number at a remote host.  A process can
     claim multiple port numbers, however, only one process may claim
     an individual port number.  All port numbers are well-known.


Miller                                                          [Page 3]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


  2.4 Sequence Number

     For each communicating pair of hosts, there are two sequence
     numbers defined, which are the send sequence numbers for the two
     ends.  Sequence numbers are treated as unsigned 16 bit integers.
     Each time a new transaction packet is sent, the sender increases
     the sequence number by one.  Initial sequence numbers are
     established when the connection is resynchronized (see Section
     4.3.)

  2.5 Length

     The length is the number of octets in this transaction packet,
     including the header and the data.  (This means that the minimum
     value of the length is 8.)

  2.6 Checksum

     The checksum is the 16-bit one's complement of the one's
     complement sum of the IRTP header and the transaction packet data
     (padded with an octet of zero if necessary to make an even number
     of octets.)



























Miller                                                          [Page 4]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


CHAPTER 3 - INTERFACES

  3.1 User Services Provided by IRTP

     The exact interface to the TRTP from the using processes is
     implementation dependent, however, IRTP should provide the
     following services to the using processes.

        o  user processes must be able to claim a port number

        o  users must be able to request that data be sent to a
           particular port at an internet address (the port must be one
           which the user has claimed)

        o  users must be able to request transaction data from a
           particular port at any (unspecified) remote internet address
           (the port must be one which the user has claimed)

        o  if a port is determined to be unreachable at a particular
           destination, the using process which has claimed that port
           should be notified

     In addition to these minimal data transfer services, a particular
     implementation may want to have a mechanism by which a
     "supervisory" (that is, port independent) module can define
     dynamically the remote internet addresses which are legal targets
     for host to host communication by this IRTP module.  This
     mechanism might be internal or external to the IRTP module itself.

  3.2 IP Services Expected by IRTP

     IRTP expects a standard interface to IP through which it can send
     and receive transaction packets as IP datagrams.  In addition, if
     possible, it is desirable that IP or ICMP notify IRTP in the event
     that a remote internet address is unreachable.

     If the IP implementation (including ICMP) is able to notify IRTP
     of source quench conditions, individual IRTP implementations may
     be able to perform some dynamic adjustment of transmission
     characteristics.









Miller                                                          [Page 5]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


CHAPTER 4 - MODEL OF OPERATION

  The basic operation of IRTP is as follows.  The first time two hosts
  communicate (or the first time after both have simultaneously
  failed,) synchronization is established using constant initial
  sequence numbers (there is a sequence number for each direction of
  transmission).  The TCP "quiet time" is used following reboots to
  insure that this will not cause inaccurate acknowledgment processing
  by one side or the other.

  Once synchronization has been achieved data may be passed in both
  directions.  Each transaction packet has a 16 bit sequence number.
  Sequence numbers increase monotonically as new packets are generated.
  The receipt of each sequence number must be acknowledged, either
  implicitly or explicitly.  At most 8 unacknowledged packets may be
  outstanding in one direction.  This number (called MAXPACK) is fixed
  for all IRTP modules. Unacknowledged packets must be periodically
  retransmitted.  Sequence numbers are also used for duplicate
  detection by receiving IRTP modules.

  If synchronization is lost due to the failure of one of the
  communicating hosts, after a reboot that host requests the remote
  host to communicate sequence number information, and data transfer
  continues.

  4.1 State Variables

     Each IRTP is associated with a single internet address.  The
     synchronization mechanism of the IRTP depends on the requirement
     that each IRTP module knows the internet addresses of all modules
     with which it will communicate.  For each remote internet address,
     an IRTP module must maintain the following information (called the
     connection table):

     rem_addr     (32 bit remote internet address)
     conn_state   (8  bit connection state)
     snd_nxt      (16 bit send sequence number)
     rcv_nxt      (16 bit expected next receive sequence number)
     snd_una      (16 bit first unacknowledged sequence number)

     In addition to maintaining the connection tables defined above, it
     is required that every IRTP module have some mechanism which
     generates "retransmission events" such that SYNCH packets are
     periodically retransmitted for any connection in synch_wait state
     (see Section 4.3), and the appropriate DATA packet is periodically
     retransmitted for any connection in data_transfer state (see
     Section 4.4.2).  It is implementation dependent whether this


Miller                                                          [Page 6]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


     mechanism is connection dependent, or a uniform mechanism for all
     connections, so it has not been made part of the connection state
     table.  See Chapter 5 for more discussion.

  4.2 IRTP Initialization

     Whenever a remote internet address becomes known by an IRTP
     process, a 2 minute "quiet time" as described in the TCP
     specification must be observed before accepting any incoming
     packets or user requests.  This is to insure that no old IRTP
     packets are still in the network.  In addition, a connection table
     is initialized as follows:

     rem_addr     =    known internet address
     conn_state   =    0 = out-of-synch
     snd_nxt      =    0
     rcv_nxt      =    0
     snd_una      =    0

     Strictly speaking, the IRTP specification does not allow
     connection tables to be dynamically deleted and recreated,
     however, if this happens the above procedure must be repeated.
     See Chapter 5 for more discussion.

  4.3 Host-to-Host Synchronization

     An IRTP module must initiate synchronization whenever it receives
     a DATA packet or a user request referencing an internet address
     whose connection state is out-of-synch.  Typically, this will
     happen only the first time that internet address is active
     following the reinitialization of the IRTP module. A SYNCH packet
     as shown below is transmitted.  Having sent this packet, the host
     enters connection state synch_wait (conn_state = 1).  In this
     state, any incoming DATA, DATA ACK or PORT NAK packets are
     ignored.  The SYNCH packet itself must be retransmitted
     periodically until synchronization has been achieved.

     4.3.1 Response to SYNCH Packets -

        Whenever a SYNCH packet is received, the recipient, regardless
        of current connection state, is required to to return a SYNCH
        ACK packet as shown below.  At this point the recipient enters
        data_transfer state (conn_state = 2).






Miller                                                          [Page 7]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


     4.3.2 Response to SYNCH ACK Packet -

        On receipt of a SYNCH ACK packet, the behavior of the recipient
        depends on its state.  If the recipient is in synch_wait state
        the recipient sets rcv_nxt to the sequence number value, sets
        snd_nxt and snd_una to the value in the two-octet data field,
        and enters data_transfer state (conn_state = 2).  Otherwise,
        the packet is ignored.

           0      7 8     15 16             31
           +--------+--------+--------+--------+
           |00000000|00000000|00000000 00000000|
           +--------+--------+--------+--------+
           |        8        |    checksum     |
           +-----------------+-----------------+

           Figure 4-1.  SYNCH Packet Format

           0      7 8     15 16             31
           +--------+--------+--------+--------+
           |00000001| unused |     snd_una     |
           +--------+--------+--------+--------+
           |        10       |    checksum     |
           +-----------------+-----------------+
           |      rcv_nxt    |
           +-----------------+

           Figure 4-2.  SYNCH ACK Packet Format

  4.4 Transmitting Data

     Once in data_transfer state DATA, DATA ACK and PORT NAK packets
     are used to achieve communication between IRTP processes, subject
     to the constraint that no more than MAXPACK unacknowledged packets
     may be transmitted on a connection at any time.  Note that all
     arithmetic operations and comparisons on sequence numbers
     described in this chapter are to be done modulo 2 to the 16.

     4.4.1 Receiving Data From Using Processes -

        User processes may request IRTP to send packets of at most 512
        user data octets to a remote internet address and IRTP port.
        When such a request is received, the behavior of the IRTP
        depends on the state of the connection with the remote host and
        on implementation dependent considerations.  If the connection




Miller                                                          [Page 8]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


        between this IRTP module and the remote host is not in
        data_transfer state, that state must be achieved (see Section
        4.3) before acting on the user request.

        Once the connection is in data_transfer state, the behavior of
        the IRTP module in reaction to a write request from a user is
        implementation dependent.  The simplest IRTP implementations
        will not accept write requests when MAXPACK unacknowledged
        packets have been sent to the remote connection and will
        provide interested users a mechanism by which they can be
        notified when the connection is no longer in this state, which
        is called flow controlled.  Such implementations are called
        blocking IRTP implementations.  These implementations check, on
        receipt of a write request, to see if the value of snd_nxt is
        less than snd_una+MAXPACK.  If it is, IRTP prepends a DATA
        packet header as shown below, and transmits the packet.  The
        value of snd_nxt is then incremented by one.  In addition, the
        packet must be retained in a retransmission queue until it is
        acknowledged.

           0       7 8     15 16             31
           +--------+--------+--------+--------+
           |00000010|port num|     snd_nxt     |
           +--------+--------+--------+--------+
           |     length      |    checksum     |
           +-----------------+-----------------+
           |           data octet(s)           |
           + . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . +

           Figure 4-3.  DATA Packet Format

        Other implementations may allow (some number of) write requests
        to be accepted even when the connection is flow controlled.
        These implementations, called non-blocking IRTP
        implementations, must maintain, in addition to the
        retransmission queue for each connection, a queue of accepted
        but not yet transmitted packets, in order of request.  This is
        called the pretransmission queue for the connection.

        When a non-blocking implementation receives a write request, if
        the connection is not flow controlled, it behaves exactly as a
        blocking IRTP.  Otherwise, it prepends a DATA packet header
        without a sequence number to the data, and appends the packet
        to the pretransmission queue.  Note that in this case, snd_nxt
        is not incremented.  The value of snd_nxt is incremented only
        when a packet is transmitted for the first time.



Miller                                                          [Page 9]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


     4.4.2 Packet Retransmission -

        The IRTP protocol requires that the transaction packet with
        sequence number snd_una be periodically retransmitted as long
        as there are any unacknowledged, but previously transmitted,
        packets (that is, as long as the value of snd_una is not equal
        to that of snd_nxt.)

        The value of snd_una increases over time due to the receipt of
        DATA ACK or PORT NAK packets from a remote host (see Sections
        4.5.3 and 4.5.4 below).  When either of these packet types is
        received, if the incoming sequence number in that packet is
        greater than the current value of snd_una, the value of snd_una
        is set to the incoming sequence number in that packet.  Any
        DATA packets with sequence number less than the new snd_una
        which were queued for retransmission are released.

        (If this is a non-blocking IRTP implementation, for each DATA
        packet which is thus released from the retransmission queue,
        the earliest buffered packet may be transmitted from the
        pretransmission queue, as long as the pretransmission queue is
        non-empty.  Prior to transmitting the packet, the current value
        of snd_nxt is put in the sequence number field of the header.
        The value of snd_nxt is then incremented by one.)

        Finally, if the acknowledgment is a PORT NAK, the user process
        with the nacked port number should be notified that the remote
        port is not there.

        It is also to be desired, though it is not required, that IRTP
        modules have some mechanism to decide that a remote host is not
        responding in order to notify user processes that this host is
        apparently unreachable.

  4.5 Receiving Data

     When an IRTP module in data_transfer state receives a DATA packet,
     its behavior depends on the port number, sequence number and
     implementation dependent space considerations.

     DATA ACK and PORT NAK packets are used to acknowledge the receipt
     of DATA packets.  Both of these acknowledgment packets acknowledge
     the receipt of all sequence numbers up to, but not including, the
     sequence number in their headers.  Note that this value is denoted
     "rcv_nxt" in the figures below.  This number is the value of
     rcv_nxt at the source of the acknowledgment packet when the
     acknowledgment was generated.


Miller                                                         [Page 10]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


        0      7 8     15 16             31
        +--------+--------+--------+--------+
        |00000011|port num|     rcv_nxt     |
        +--------+--------+--------+--------+
        |        8        |    checksum     |
        +-----------------+-----------------+

        Figure 4-4.  DATA ACK Packet Format

        0      7 8     15 16             31
        +--------+--------+--------+--------+
        |00000100|port num|     rcv_nxt     |
        +--------+--------+--------+--------+
        |        8        |    checksum     |
        +-----------------+-----------------+

        Figure 4-5.  PORT NAK Packet Format

     It is not required that a receiving IRTP implementation return an
     acknowledgment packet for every incoming DATA packet, nor is it
     required that the acknowledged sequence number be that in the most
     recently received packet.  The exact circumstances under which
     DATA ACK and PORT NAK packets are sent are detailed below.  The
     net effect is that every sequence number is acknowledged, a sender
     can force reacknowledgment if an ACK is lost, all acknowledgments
     are cumulative, and no out of order acknowledgments are permitted.

     4.5.1 Receive and Acknowledgment Windows -

        Each IRTP module has two windows associated with the receive
        side of a connection.  For convenience in the following
        discussion these are given names.  The sequence number window

        rcv_nxt-MAXPACK =< sequence number < rcv_nxt

        is called the acknowledge window.  All sequence numbers within
        this window represent packets which have previously been acked
        or nacked, however, the ack or nack may have been lost in the
        network.

        The sequence number window

        rcv_nxt =< sequence number < rcv_nxt+MYRCV =< rcv_nxt+MAXPACK

        is called the receive window.  All sequence numbers within this
        window represent legal packets which may be in transit,
        assuming that the remote host has received acks for all packets


Miller                                                         [Page 11]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


        in the acknowledge window.  The value of MYRCV depends on the
        implementation of the IRTP.  In the simplest case this number
        will be one, effectively meaning that the IRTP will ignore any
        incoming packets not in the acknowledge window or not equal to
        rcv_nxt.  If the IRTP has enough memory to buffer some incoming
        out-of-order packets, MYRCV can be set to some number =<
        MAXPACK and a more complex algorithm can be used to compute
        rcv_nxt, thereby achieving potentially greater efficiency.
        Note that in the latter case, these packets are not
        acknowledged until their sequence number is less than rcv_nxt,
        thereby insuring that acknowledgments are always cumulative.
        (See 4.5.4 below.)

     4.5.2 Invalid Packets -

        When an IRTP receives a DATA packet, it first checks the
        sequence number in the received packet.  If the sequence number
        is not within the acknowledge or receive window, the packet is
        discarded.  Similarly, if the computed checksum does not match
        that in the header, the packet is discarded.  No further action
        is taken.

     4.5.3 Sequence Numbers Within Acknowledge Window -

        When an IRTP receives an incoming DATA packet whose sequence
        number is within the acknowledge window, if the port specified
        in the incoming DATA packet is known to this IRTP, a DATA ACK
        packet is returned.  Otherwise, a PORT NAK is returned.

        In both cases, the value put in the sequence number field of
        the acknowlegement packet is the current value of rcv_nxt at
        the IRTP module which is acknowledging the DATA packet.  The
        DATA packet itself is discarded.

        (Note that the PORT NAK acknowledges reception of all packet
        numbers up to rcv_nxt.  It NAKs the port number, not the
        sequence number.)

     4.5.4 Sequence Numbers Within the Receive Window -

        If the received sequence number is within the receive window,
        rcv_nxt is recomputed.  How this is done is implementation
        dependent.  If MYRCV is one, then rcv_nxt is simply
        incremented.  Otherwise, rcv_nxt is set to the lowest sequence
        number such that all data packets with sequence numbers less




Miller                                                         [Page 12]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


        than this number have been received and are buffered at the
        receiving IRTP, or have been delivered to their destination
        port.

        Once rcv_nxt has been recomputed, a DATA ACK or PORT NAK is
        returned, depending on whether the port number is known or not
        known.  The value placed in the sequence number field is the
        newly computed value for rcv_nxt.

     4.5.5 Forwarding Data to Using Processes -

        Whenever an incoming DATA packet has been acknowledged (either
        implicitly or explicitly) its header can be stripped off and it
        can be queued for delivery to the user process which has
        claimed its port number.  If the IRTP implementation allows
        MYRCV to be greater than one, care must be taken that data
        which was originally received out of order is forwarded to its
        intended recipient in order of original sequence number.































Miller                                                         [Page 13]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


CHAPTER 5 - IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES

  The preceding chapter was left intentionally vague in certain ways.
  In particular, no explicit description of the use of a timer or
  timers within an IRTP module was given, nor was there a description
  of how timer events should relate to "retransmission events".  This
  was done to separate the syntactic and operational requirements of
  the protocol from the performance characteristics of its
  implementation.

  It is believed that the protocol is robust.  That is, any
  implementation which strictly conforms to Chapter 4 should provide
  reliable synchronization of two hosts and reliable sequenced transfer
  of transaction data between them.  However, different ways of
  defining the notion of a retransmission event can have potentially
  significant impact on the performance of the protocol in terms of
  throughput and in terms of the load it places on the network.  It is
  up to the implementor to take into account overall requirements of
  the network environment and the intended use of the protocol, if
  possible, to optimize overall characteristics of the implementation.
  Several such issues will be discussed in this chapter.

  5.1 Retransmission Strategies

     The IRTP requires that a timer mechanism exists to somehow trigger
     retransmissions and requires that the packet with sequence number
     snd_una be the one retransmitted.  It is not required that
     retransmission be performed on every timer event, though this is
     one "retransmission strategy".  A possible alternative strategy is
     to perform a retransmission on a timer event only if no ACKs have
     been received since the last event.

     Additionally, the interval of the timer can affect the performance
     of the strategies, as can the value of MYRCV and the lossiness of
     the network environment.

     It is not within the scope of this document to recommend a
     retransmission strategy, only to point out that different
     strategies have different consequences.  It might be desirable to
     allow using processes to "specify" a strategy when a port is
     claimed in order to tailor the service of the protocol to the
     needs of a particular application.

  5.2 Pinging

     It is important to make explicit that IRTP modules ping by
     definition.  That is, as long as a remote internet address is


Miller                                                         [Page 14]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


     known, and is in use (that is, either synchronization or data
     transfer is being attempted), the protocol requires "periodic
     retransmission" of packets.  Note that this is true even if the
     IRTP module has determined that the remote address is currently
     unreachable.

     It is suggested that this situation can be made more sensible by
     adding two fields to the connection table.  These are:

     num_retries  (number of times current packet has been sent)
     time_out     (current retransmission timeout)

     These fields are to be used as follows.  It is assumed that there
     is some default initial value for time_out called DEFTIME, some
     (relatively long) value for time_out called PINGTIME and some
     value MAX_TRIES.  The exact values of these constants are
     implementation dependent.  The value of DEFTIME may also be
     retransmission strategy dependent.

     At the time that a connection table is initialized, num_retries is
     set to zero, and time_out is set to DEFTIME.  Whenever a
     retransmission event occurs (this will either be a retransmission
     of a SYNCH packet or of the packet with sequence number snd_una),
     num_retries is incremented by one unless it is equal to MAX_TRIES.
     If a destination is determined to be unreachable, either via an
     ICMP message or a Destination Host Dead message, num_retries is
     set to MAX_TRIES.  Whenever num_retries transitions to MAX_TRIES,
     either by being incremented or as above, the destination is is
     presumed unreachable and user processes are notified. At this
     point, time_out is set to PINGTIME, the state of the connection
     does not change and retransmissions occur at PINGTIME intervals
     until the destination becomes reachable.

     Conversely, whenever a SYNCH_ACK is received (in synch_wait
     state), or an (implicit or explicit) acknowledgment of sequence
     number snd_una is received (in data transfer state), time_out is
     set to DEFTIME and num_retries is reset to zero.  If time_out was
     already set to PINGTIME, user processes are notified that the
     destination is now reachable.

     The effect of this system is obvious.  The implementation still
     pings as required, but at presumably very infrequent intervals.
     Alternative solutions, which might place the decision to ping on
     using processes, are considered undesirable because

        o  IRTP itself becomes more complicated in terms of states of
           the connection table


Miller                                                         [Page 15]



RFC 938                                                    February 1985
Internet Reliable Transaction Protocol


        o  the user interface becomes both more complicated and more
           rigid

        o  such solutions might be deadlock prone in some instances

        o  it seems appropriate that the host to host protocol should
           be the place to determine destination reachability, if the
           overall application requires that such information be known
           (as it does in the environments intended for IRTP.)

  5.3 Deleting Connection Tables

     The protocol as defined does not allow connection tables to be
     deleted (or for a connection state to transition to out_of_synch
     from any other state).  It might be appropriate to delete a
     connection table if it is known that the destination internet
     address is no longer one which this host wants to communicate
     with.  (The only danger there is that if the destination does not
     know this, it could ping this host forever.)  It is dangerous to
     delete a connection table or to go into out_of_synch state to
     avoid pinging when a destination does not appear to be there.  Two
     hosts with the same such strategy could potentially deadlock and
     fail to resynchronize.

AUTHOR'S ADDRESS

  Trudy Miller
  Advanced Computer Communications
  720 Santa Barbara Street
  Santa Barbara, CA  93101
  (805) 963-9431


















Miller                                                         [Page 16]