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@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 08/01/12 13:00, John Day wrote:That is an interesting point.
You are also correct that strictly speaking the words "protocol" and
"algorithm" are probably the same.
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@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
--
Thanks & Regards,
Pankaj Kumar,
Mobile: +91 8939008891
http://in.linkedin.com/in/techiepankaj
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf