QTP as Transaction Transport Layer Highcapacity connectionoriented transaction

Introduction u Who is INETCO? G G u u Software vendor linking institutions with

Typical POS Architecture POS Terminals (1000 s to 100 ks) Network Access Controllers or

Transport Layer Requirements u Performance G G u G G G Restrict by source

IP-oriented Architecture POS Terminals INAC clusters Remote Access Servers X. 25/Dial Access Network IP

QTP Overview u Status G G u Released as Internet Draft: · draft-cornish-qtp-01. txt

QTP Attributes u Session Establishment G G G G Called / Calling party addresses

Closing Comments u QTP not a fit for client side, unless client is really

Slides: 8

Download presentation

QTP as Transaction Transport Layer High-capacity, connection-oriented transaction transport Cameron_Young@inetco. com (604) 451 -1567 Connectivity. . . guaranteed.

Introduction u Who is INETCO? G G u u Software vendor linking institutions with terminals See www. inetco. com G G Our perspective G G Financial/retail vertical market Financial TP is often “Most mission critical application” We make new elements evolving into a system communicate with what is already there. Normally we work in all layers below ISO 8583 or equivalent message. Connectivity. . . guaranteed. Why are we here? u Joint authors of QTP - transport protocol for POS transactions over IP. SOAP/HTTP emphasizes client-web -server interaction. QTP addresses concentration points (back-end). Scope G Deal with communication issues, not use of RPC vs. Message API.

Typical POS Architecture POS Terminals (1000 s to 100 ks) Network Access Controllers or FEP X. 25/Dial Access Network Institutions EFT TPs SNA/X. 25/FR Access Network Message (ISO 8583 or other) Message Visa, TPDU, CLNP, None Visa, TPDU, CLNP, TPDU HDLC, X. 25, Async X. 25, FR, IP Connectivity. . . guaranteed.

Transport Layer Requirements u Performance G G u G G G Restrict by source access network address Restrict by source transport-layer address Restrict RAS - INAC communication Provide legal intercept Transaction delivery G G Either non-reliable delivery, or Reliable delivery with end-to-end data acknowledgements Connectivity. . . guaranteed. Access Network independence G u Security G u Fast connection processing High availability u Transport layer independence G u X. 25, FR, Dialup, . . . TCP or UDP, FR, other Scaling G G G >100 k transaction terminals >100 financial institutions Initial peak ~500 TPS with scalable growth

IP-oriented Architecture POS Terminals INAC clusters Remote Access Servers X. 25/Dial Access Network IP Network Institution EFT TPs SNA/X. 25/FR Access Network Message (ISO 8583 or other) Message (as is) Visa, TPDU, CLNP, None Transport (as is) Host transport HDLC, X. 25, Async QTP X. 25, SNA, FR UDP/IP Connectivity. . . guaranteed.

QTP Overview u Status G G u Released as Internet Draft: · draft-cornish-qtp-01. txt First applications in production Incorporated by other vendors. Opensource version available for draft-cornish-qtp-00. txt Characteristics G G G G Lightweight connection multiplexing Symmetric Individual message acks Status for source routing decisions. Independent of lower-level transport Attribute/Value based Extensible Connectivity. . . guaranteed. u Header G G G u Version Msg ID, Msg ID Ack, Priority flags Length Src / Dest Logical Channel Number Optional Msg ID, Msg ID Ack values Attributes for G G G Session establishment Data transfer Session management Element status Statistical information Vendor extensions

QTP Attributes u Session Establishment G G G G Called / Calling party addresses Called / Calling party subaddresses Address family (E. 164, X. 121, …) Profile, speed, idle timeout Max message Protocol identifier Customer group identifier u Session Management G G u Element Status G G G u Data Transfer G G G Data / Block data Management info Q Data / Call Data G u Flow control state (Available, Congested) Station status (Primary, Secondary, …) Ping Call state Statistical Information G G G Connectivity. . . guaranteed. Cause (Normal, various QTP causes) Remote cause (Normal, various Access causes) Messages received / sent Unacked messages Time since last restart

Closing Comments u QTP not a fit for client side, unless client is really a gateway / proxy for many transaction generators. u Primary incentive for choosing QTP today is scaling beyond TCP session limits. QTP addresses concentrated connection-oriented transactions. u May be future interest in SOAP over QTP. G u Would require split into SOAP encapsulation and SOAP over HTTP specs. As transaction concentration increases, so does emphasis on security, reliability, and performance. Connectivity. . . guaranteed.