Computer networking application protocols: Difference between revisions
John Leach (talk | contribs) m (Text replacement - "]]" to "") |
mNo edit summary |
||
Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
*Content confidentiality | *Content confidentiality | ||
*Traffic flow confidentiality | *Traffic flow confidentiality | ||
*Nonrepudiation | *Nonrepudiation[[Category:Suggestion Bot Tag]] |
Latest revision as of 16:00, 31 July 2024
This article may be deleted soon. | ||
---|---|---|
Computer networking application protocols travel over computer networking end-to-end protocols to provide services meaningful to application programs residing in the endpoints. The application protocols differ in the kind of information they transfer (e.g., self-contained messages, file transfer|computer files, remote procedure calls, spoken language, etc.). Note well that these are not directly accessible to a human user. To draw an analogy to postal mail, a person can drop an envelope into a mailbox, but has no access either to the mechanism between mailbox and post office, or post office to post office. Application protocols also differ in their expectations of the performance end-to-end service below them. The application protocol may provide security, expect certain security services from the end-to-end or computer networking internetwork protocols over which they run, or both. Classes of information transferMessageMessages are self-contained units of data, which may contain other types of data. Message handling protocols are analogous to postal protocols. Different protocols run among mail clients that provide a human interface; message transfer agents analogous to post offices, possibly at multiple levels of a hierarchy; and message stores, analogous to temporary mailboxes. The major IETF message transfer paradigms and protocols include:
See messaging application protocols for further detail FileFiles are sequences of units of data. Structured dataRemote procedure callsCharacter- or bit-oriented interactionDirectory servicesNetwork management servicesExpectations of the end-to-end servicePerformanceThey may be tolerant or intolerant of impairments such as:
Security
|