# URLs for non-Internet networks?

Karen R. Sollins (sollins@lcs.mit.edu)
Thu, 22 Jul 93 14:23:07 -0400

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Kevin Altis: "Re: URLs for non-Internet networks?"
- Previous message: Peter Lister, Cranfield Computer Centre: ""Local" file access in the URL draft RFC"
- In reply to: Kevin Altis: "Re: URLs for non-Internet networks?"
- Next in thread: Bernard D. Aboba: "Re: URLs for non-Internet networks?"

    Date: Thu, 22 Jul 93 14:23:07 -0400

    Message-Id: <9307221823.AA10006@zippy.lcs.mit.edu>

    From: Karen R. Sollins <sollins@lcs.mit.edu>

    To: kevin@scic.intel.com

    In-Reply-To: Kevin Altis's message of Wed, 21 Jul 1993 11:48:06 -0800 <9307211849.AA20204@rs042.scic.intel.com>

    Subject: URLs for non-Internet networks?

Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1993 11:48:06 -0800
From: Kevin Altis <kevin@scic.intel.com>
X-Sender: kevin@rs042.scic.intel.com

Protocol server/gateways
It would be nice to consider appropriate methods for accessing those items
not directly connected to the Internet. For quite some time I've been
pondering how best to provide a server that speaks IP and Novell (and/or
AppleTalk) so that a network of Novell clients could access Internet
services such as WWW without speaking IP and just as importantly how this
multi-protocol server would allow IP clients and servers to access
information sitting on the non-IP network. The server might communicate
with clients via AppleEvents on the AppleTalk side. This scenario still
assumes a server connected to the Internet. This problem and general issues
apply to accessing the information on networks such as Compuserve, BIX,
GEnie, Prodigy, etc. and other services that don't have more of a link to
the Internet than gatewayed mail, even though they could have this kind of
simulated direct access. Many gateway solutions are probably possible, but
the case of non-IP nets communicating through one or more multi-protocol
servers seems worth pursuing with regards to the web.

You want application level gateways! This is something we've been
proposing for ages, but always seems to drop below the critical point
when it comes to allocating time. Mail gateways are a clear example.
The issue is that the commonality or point of agreement in
communication is at the application for one or many reasons.
Application level gateways solve both the problem of heterogeneous
transport and heterogeneous policy control that can only be expressed
in application level terms. For example, they allow restricted access
based on application level knowledge, or various accounting schemes to
be put in-line in the communication, at the application level.
Anyway, go for it! There are some difficult problems lurking if you
are looking for any sort of generality, but even if you aren't, more
specific examples would help those who are and you might just solve
your specific problems in the meantime.
Karen

- Next message: Kevin Altis: "Re: URLs for non-Internet networks?"
- Previous message: Peter Lister, Cranfield Computer Centre: ""Local" file access in the URL draft RFC"
- In reply to: Kevin Altis: "Re: URLs for non-Internet networks?"
- Next in thread: Bernard D. Aboba: "Re: URLs for non-Internet networks?"