Advertisement

Abstract

Mobility is a network capability with many forms and many uses. Because it is difficult to implement at Internet scale, there is a large and confusing landscape of mobility proposals which cannot easily be compared or composed. This paper presents formal models of two distinct patterns for implementing mobility, explaining their generality and applicability. We also employ formal verification to show that different instances of the patterns, used for different purposes in a network architecture, compose without alteration or interference. This result applies to all real implementations that are refinements of the patterns.

Keywords

Alloy Model Shared State Internet Protocol Address User Layer Lower Endpoint 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bishop, S., Fairbairn, M., Norrish, M., Sewell, P., Smith, M., Wansbrough, K.: Rigorous specification and conformance testing techniques for network protocols, as applied to TCP, UDP and sockets. In: Proceedings of SIGCOMM 2005. ACM (August 2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cardelli, L., Gordon, A.D.: Mobile ambients. Theoretical Computer Science 240(1), 177–213 (2000)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clark, D.D.: The design philosophy of the DARPA Internet protocols. In: Proceedings of SIGCOMM. ACM (August 1988)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Day, J.: Patterns in Network Architecture: A Return to Fundamentals. Prentice Hall (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Herzberg, D., Broy, M.: Modeling layered distributed communication systems. Formal Aspects of Computing 17(1), 1–18 (2005)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Holzmann, G.J.: The Spin Model Checker: Primer and Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ITU. Information Technology—Open Systems Interconnection—Basic Reference Model: The basic model. ITU-T Recommendation X.200 (1994)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jackson, D.: Software Abstractions: Logic, Language, and Analysis. MIT Press (2006, 2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Karsten, M., Keshav, S., Prasad, S., Beg, M.: An axiomatic basis for communication. In: Proceedings of SIGCOMM, pp. 217–228. ACM (August 2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Loo, B.T., Condie, T., Hellerstein, J.M., Maniatis, P., Roscoe, T., Stoica, I.: Implementing declarative overlays. In: Proceedings of the 20th ACM Symposium on Operating System Principles, pp. 75–90. ACM (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mao, Y., Loo, B.T., Ives, Z., Smith, J.M.: MOSAIC: Unified declarative platform for dynamic overlay composition. In: Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Future Networking Technologies. ACM SIGCOMM (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mysore, J., Bharghavan, V.: A new multicasting-based architecture for Internet host mobility. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking. ACM (1997)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rexford, J., Zave, P.: Report of the DIMACS Working Group on Abstractions for Network Services, Architecture, and Implementation. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 43(1), 56–59 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roscoe, T.: The end of Internet architecture. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Spatscheck, O.: Layers of success. IEEE Internet Computing 17(1), 3–6 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zave, P., Rexford, J.: The design space of network mobility. In: Bonaventure, O., Haddadi, H. (eds.) Recent Advances in Networking. ACM SIGCOMM (to appear, 2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zhu, Z., Wakikawa, R., Zhang, L.: A survey of mobility support in the Internet. IETF Request for Comments 6301 (July 2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pamela Zave
    • 1
  • Jennifer Rexford
    • 2
  1. 1.AT&T Laboratories—ResearchFlorham ParkUSA
  2. 2.Princeton UniversityPrincetonUSA

Personalised recommendations