DOCSLIB.ORG

Remote Procedure Call (RPC)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Remote Procedure Call (RPC) Remote Procedure Call CS-4513 Distributed Systems Hugh C. Lauer Slides include materials from Modern Operating Systems, 3rd ed., by Tannenbaum, Operating System Concepts, 7th ed., by Silbershatz, Galvin, & Gagne, Distributed Systems: Principles & Paradigms, 2nd ed. By Tanenbaum and Van Steen, and Distributed Systems: Concepts and Design, 4th ed., by Coulouris, et. al. CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 1 Review Definition — Protocol • Formal set of rules that govern the formats, contents, and meanings of messages from computer to computer, process to process, etc. • Must be agreed to by all parties to a communication • May be defined in terms of other protocols • E.g., 7-layer OSI model CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 2 Message-oriented Protocols • Many in widespread use • Traditional TCP/IP and Internet protocols • Difficult to design and implement • Especially with more sophisticated applications • Many difficult implementation issues for each new protocol and each platform • Formatting • Uniform representation of data • Client-server relationships • … CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 3 Alphabet Soup of many, many Protocols • TCP, UDP, IP, NCP, SMTP, SNNP, NNTP, FTP, TFTP, POP, IMAP, HTTP, VMRL, … • Appletalk, Netware, … • Remote Procedure Call, NFS, … • CORBA, GLOBE, JINI, … • Network Streaming, … • … CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 4 Message-oriented Protocols • Many in widespread use • Traditional TCP/IP and Internet protocols • Difficult to design and implement • Especially with more sophisticated applications • Many difficult implementation issues for each new protocol and each platform • Formatting • Uniform representation of data • Client-server relationships • … CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 5 Problem • How to make sense out of many different kinds of protocols • How to design new protocols for new, more sophisticated applications • How to automate the nitty-gritty of protocol design and testing CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 6 Solution — Remote Procedure Call (RPC) • The most common framework for newer protocols and for middleware • Used both by operating systems and by applications – NFS (Network File System) is implemented as a set of RPCs – DCOM, CORBA, Java RMI, etc., are just RPC systems • Seminal reference – Birrell, Andrew D., and Nelson, Bruce, “Implementing Remote Procedure Calls,” ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, vol. 2, #1, February 1984, pp 39- 59. (.pdf) CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 7 Reading Assignment • Tanenbaum, 8.2.4 • Also online tutorials on this slide:– CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 8 Remote Procedure Call (RPC) • Fundamental idea: – – Server process exports an interface of procedures or functions that can be called by client programs • similar to library API, class definitions, etc. • Clients make local procedure/function calls – As if directly linked with the server process – Under the covers, procedure/function call is converted into a message exchange with remote server process CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 9 Ordinary procedure/function call count = read(fd, buf, bytes) CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 10 Remote Procedure Call • Would like to do the same if called procedure or function is on a remote server CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 11 Solution — a pair of Stubs • A client-side stub is a function that looks to the client as if it were a callable function of a local service – I.e., same API as the service’s implementation of the function • Service-side stub looks like a local client calling the service – I.e., like a hunk of code invoking the service function • The client program thinks it’s invoking a local service – but it’s really calling into the client-side stub • The service program thinks it’s called by a local client – but it’s really called by the service-side stub • The stubs send messages to each other to make the RPC happen transparently (almost!) CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 12 RPC Stubs Tanenbaum & Van Steen, Fig 4-7 CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 13 RPC Stubs Not shown in this textbook figure are Steps 7, 8, and 9, where the server process returns a result to Tanenbaum & Van Steen, Fig 4-7 server stub, which packages it and sends it across network to client CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedurestub. Call 14 RPC Stubs – Summary • Client-side stub • Server-side stub – Looks like local server – Looks like local client function to the client function to server – Listens on a socket for – Same interface as message from client local function stub – Bundles arguments – Un-bundles arguments into a message, sends to local variables to server-side stub – Makes a local function – Waits for reply, un- call to server bundles results – Bundles result into – returns reply message to client stub CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 15 Result – a very useful Abstraction • The hard work of building messages, formatting, uniform representation, etc., is buried in the stubs • Where it can be automated! • Designers of client and service can concentrate on semantics of application • Programs behave in familiar way CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 16 Questions? CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 17 RPC – Issues • How to make the “remote” part of RPC invisible to the programmer? • What are semantics of parameter passing? – E.g., pass by reference? • How to bind (locate & connect) to servers? • How to handle heterogeneity? – OS, language, architecture, … • How to make it go fast? CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 18 RPC Model • A server defines the service interface using an interface definition language (IDL) – the IDL specifies the names, parameters, and types for all client-callable server functions • A stub compiler reads the IDL declarations and produces two stub functions for each service function – Server-side and client-side CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 19 RPC Model (continued) • Linking:– – Server programmer implements the service’s functions and links with the server-side stubs – Client programmer implements the client program and links it with client-side stubs • Operation:– – Stubs manage all of the details of remote communication between client and server CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 20 RPC Stubs Tanenbaum & Van Steen, Fig 4-7 CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 21 Marshalling and Unmarshalling Arguments • Marshalling – the packing of function parameters into a message • Unmarshalling – the extraction of parameters from a message • Function call:– – Client stub marshals the arguments into message – Server stub unmarshals the arguments and uses them to invoke the service function • Function return:– – Server stub marshals return values into message – Client stub unmarshals return values and returns them as results to client program CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 22 Issue #1 — Data Representation • Big endian vs. little endian Sent by Pentium Rec’d by SPARC After inversion CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 23 Data Representation (continued) • IDL must also define representation of data on network – Multi-byte integers – Strings, character codes – Floating point, complex, … – … • example: Sun’s XDR (eXternal Data Representation) • Each stub converts machine representation to/from network representation • Clients and servers must not try to cast data! CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 24 Issue #2 — Pointers and References read(int fd, char* buf, int nbytes) • Pointers are only valid within one address space • Cannot be interpreted by another process • Even on same machine! • Pointers and references are ubiquitous in C and C++ • Even in Java implementations! CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 25 Pointers and References — Restricted Semantics • Option: call by value – Sending stub dereferences pointer, copies result to message – Receiving stub conjures up a new pointer • Option: call by result – Sending stub provides buffer, called function puts data into it – Receiving stub copies data to caller’s buffer as specified by pointer CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 26 Pointers and References — Restricted Semantics (continued) • Option: call by value-result – Caller’s stub copies data to message, then copies result back to client buffer – Server stub keeps data in own buffer, server updates it; server sends data back in reply • Not allowed:– – Call by reference – Aliased arguments CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 27 Questions? CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 28 Observation — Remote Procedure Call • It should not be possible for a client to tell whether the service is implemented by • The same process • A different process in the same machine • A process on a different machine • It should not be possible for a service to tell whether the client is implemented by • The same process • A different process on the same machine Except with respect• toA failuresprocess on a different machine Client and server processes can fail CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 29 independently Three More RPC Topics • Transport • Connection vs. connectionless protocol • Asynchronous RPC • RPC Binding CS-4513, D-Term 2010 Remote Procedure Call 30 Transport of Remote Procedure Call • Option — TCP • Connection-based, reliable transmission • Useful but heavyweight, less efficient • Necessary if repeating a call produces different result • Alternative — UDP • Unreliable transmission • If message fails to arrive within
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Remote Procedure Calls
    Lectures on distributed systems Remote Procedure Calls Paul Krzyzanowski Introduction, or what’s wrong with sockets? OCKETS are a fundamental part of client-server networking. They provide a S relatively easy mechanism for a program to establish a connection to another program, either on a remote or local machine and send messages back and forth (we can even use read and write system calls). This interface, however, forces us to design our distributed applications using a read/write (input/output) inter- face which is not how we generally design non-distributed applications. In design- ing centralized applications, the procedure call is usually the standard interface model. If we want to make distributed computing look like centralized comput- ing, input-output-based communications is not the way to accomplish this. In 1984, Birrell and Nelson devised a mechanism to allow programs to call procedures on other machines. A process on machine A can call a procedure on machine B. The process on A is suspended and execution continues on B. When B returns, the return value is passed to A and A continues execution. This mechanism is called the Remote Procedure Call (RPC). To the programmer, the goal is that it should appear as if a normal procedure call is taking place. Obvi- ously, a remote procedure call is different from a local one in the underlying implementation. Steps in a remote procedure call Clearly, there is no architectural support for making remote procedure calls. A local procedure call generally involves placing the calling parameters on the stack and executing some form of a call instruction to the address of the proce- dure.
    [Show full text]
  • Distributed Objects in C
    Rochester Institute of Technology RIT Scholar Works Theses 2006 Distributed Objects in C# Xiaoyun Xie Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.rit.edu/theses Recommended Citation Xie, Xiaoyun, "Distributed Objects in C#" (2006). Thesis. Rochester Institute of Technology. Accessed from This Master's Project is brought to you for free and open access by RIT Scholar Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of RIT Scholar Works. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Rochester Institute of Technology Department of Computer Science Master of Science Project Distributed Objects System in C# Submitted By: Xie, Xiaoyun (Sherry) Date: February 2004 Chairman: Dr. Axel T. Schreiner Reader: Dr. Hans-Peter Bischof Observer: Dr. James Heliotis 2 ABSTRACT Today more and more programs run over a collection of autonomous computers linked by a network and are designed to produce an integrated computing facility. Java Distributed Objects (JDO) proposed by Dr. Axel T. Schreiner [1] builds an infrastructure which allows distributed program components to communicate over a network in a transparent, reliable, efficient, and generic way. JDO was originally intended as a teaching device to assess design parameters for distributed objects. This project focuses on porting JDO, which is implemented in Java on Sun’s JDK, to C# on Microsoft’s .NET. On one hand, it builds an infrastructure in C# that simplifies the construction of distributed programs by hiding the distributed nature of remote objects. On the other hand, it generates insights into the differences between two platforms, namely, Java on Sun and C# on .NET, in the distributed objects area.
    [Show full text]
  • More Efficient Serialization and RMI for Java
    To appear in: Concurrency: Practice & Experience, Vol. 11, 1999. More Ecient Serialization and RMI for Java Michael Philippsen, Bernhard Haumacher, and Christian Nester Computer Science Department, University of Karlsruhe Am Fasanengarten 5, 76128 Karlsruhe, Germany [phlippjhaumajnester]@ira.u ka.de http://wwwipd.ira.uka.de/JavaPa rty/ Abstract. In current Java implementations, Remote Metho d Invo ca- tion RMI is to o slow, esp ecially for high p erformance computing. RMI is designed for wide-area and high-latency networks, it is based on a slow ob ject serialization, and it do es not supp ort high-p erformance commu- nication networks. The pap er demonstrates that a much faster drop-in RMI and an ecient drop-in serialization can b e designed and implemented completely in Java without any native co de. Moreover, the re-designed RMI supp orts non- TCP/IP communication networks, even with heterogeneous transp ort proto cols. We demonstrate that for high p erformance computing some of the ocial serialization's generality can and should b e traded for sp eed. Asaby-pro duct, a b enchmark collection for RMI is presented. On PCs connected through Ethernet, the b etter serialization and the improved RMI save a median of 45 maximum of 71 of the runtime for some set of arguments. On our Myrinet-based ParaStation network a cluster of DEC Alphas wesave a median of 85 maximum of 96, compared to standard RMI, standard serialization, and Fast Ethernet; a remote metho d invo cation runs as fast as 80 s round trip time, compared to ab out 1.5 ms.
    [Show full text]
  • Remote Procedure Call (RPC)
    Remote Procedure Call (RPC) RPC – RMI - Web Services 1 Complexity of the distributed applications . The programming of distributed applications is difficult. In addition to the usual tasks, programmers who build clients and servers must deal with the complex issues of communication. Although many of the needed functions are supplied by a standard API such as the socket interface, the socket calls require the programmer to specify many low level details as names ,addresses,protocols and ports. Moreover, asinchronous communications models are complex to implement. Distributed implementations tend to use the same standard API (e.g.,the socket interface). As a consequence most of the detailed code found in one program is replicated in others RPC – RMI - Web Services 2 . For example, all client programs that use a connection oriented transport must create a socket, specify the server’s endpoint address, open a connection to the server, send requests,receive responses and close the connection when interaction is complete. Tools (software that generates all or part of a computer program) have been created to construct clients and servers. Tools cannot eliminate all programming: a programmer must supply the code that perform the computation for the particular service. However, a tool can handle the communication details. As a result the code contains fever bugs. RPC – RMI - Web Services 3 . RPC = Remote Procedure Call . The basic model has been proposed by Birrell e Nelson in 1984. The essence of this technique is to allow programs on different machines to interact using simple procedure call/return semantics, just as if the two programs were in the same computer .
    [Show full text]
  • Inter Process Communication with Message Passing
    Operating systems (vimia219) Collaboration of Tasks Tamás Kovácsházy, PhD 13rd Topic Inter Process Communication with Message Passing Budapest University of Technology and Economics Department of Measurement and Information Systems Looking back, communication solutions . Using shared memory(RAM or PRAM model): o Among threads running in the context of a process (shared memory of the process) . Messages: o No shared memory • Among processes running inside an operating system • Distributed system (network communication) o Microkernel based operating system . Inter Process Communication, IPC © BME-MIT 2014, All Rights Reserved 2. lap Messages . Different from the same word used in computer networks o We consider a more generic notion of message . Message passing . For example: o System call o TCP/IP connection (TCP) or message (UDP) for internal (localhost) or external communication (among machines) . Most cases they are implemented as OS API function/method calls resulting a system call . The operating system implements them by its services © BME-MIT 2014, All Rights Reserved 3. lap Some notes . Semaphore, Critical section object, and Mutex are also implemented by the OS and handled by system calls o Threads running in the context of a process communicate using shared memory (fast, low resource utilization) o Mutual exclusion and synchronization are solved by messages (using system calls). o It has some overhead: • Experiments: Lockless programming, transactional memory etc. • There is no good solution, but we can pick a better one than
    [Show full text]
  • CSE 486/586 Distributed Systems Remote Procedure Call Recall?
    Recall? App CSE 486/586 Distributed Systems Remote Procedure Call Socket API TCP UDP OS Steve Ko IP Computer Sciences and Engineering University at Buffalo Device Drivers Network Interface CSE 486/586 CSE 486/586 2 Socket API What’s Wrong with Socket API? Server • Low-level read/write socket() • Communication oriented • Same sequence of calls, repeated many times bind() • Etc, etc… Client listen() • Not programmer friendly socket() establish accept() connection connect() block send request write() read() process request send response write() read() CSE 486/586 3 CSE 486/586 4 Another Abstraction RPC • RPC (Remote Procedure Call) • Client • Server – Goal: it should appear that the programmer is calling a local function int main (…) … – Mechanism to enable function calls between different { processes – First proposed in the 80’s … void rpc_call(…) { • Examples rpc_call(…); … – Sun RPC … } – Java RMI – CORBA } • Other examples that borrow the idea … – XML-RPC – Android Bound Services with AIDL – Google Protocol Buffers CSE 486/586 5 CSE 486/586 6 C 1 Local Procedure Call Remote Procedure Call • E.g., x = local_call(“str”); • Give an illusion of doing a local call • The compiler generates coDe to transfer necessary • Closer to the programmers things to local_call – Language-level construct, not OS-level support – Push the parameters to the stack • What are some of the challenges? – Call local_call – How do you know that there are remote calls available? • The compiler also generates coDe to execute the – How do you pass the parameters? local call. – How do you find the correct server process? – Assigns registers – How do you get the return value? – AdJust stack pointers – Saves the return value – Calls the return instruction CSE 486/586 7 CSE 486/586 8 Stub, Marshalling, & Unmarshalling RPC Process • Stub functions: local interface to make it appear that the call is local.
    [Show full text]
  • Remote Procedure Call Protocol
    Remote Procedure Call Protocol Batholomew wish his killdees detains inaccessibly or swaggeringly after Morris rival and screw sartorially, scotopic and lipped. Juanita synthesizes her illuminist ruddily, detoxicant and odious. Toneless Rusty recommence irruptively. Access control to a procedure call machine boundaries has been performed by the major version number represented by procedure call protocol The client can custom this proxy or façade as though we actually implemented these interfaces, although one actually delegates the invocation to the implementation. In dust, an RPC server uses a standard HTTP server on several specific endpoint. The server side is simpler than the client. They provide remote objects to an email below illustrates one final piece to remote procedure call protocol does in a call is allowed to you can infer that can use. You should charge a copy of this. There now be an led even though the offspring was accepted. Determine those data types of fit procedure calling arguments and the result argument. TODO: we pull review the class names and whatnot in color here. IP address of the server that has responded. Because of transport independence, the RPC protocol does he attach specific semantics to three remote procedures or their execution requirements. IP where our office site is hosted. That gross, can a malicious host yeah a message an retransmit it at a hideous time? Rpc calls do a server, or rejected due to do this does a remote procedure parameters as a given server in this strategy for email below illustrates an office with call protocol stacks as this.
    [Show full text]
  • A Fully In-Browser Client and Server Web Application Debug and Test Environment
    LIBERATED: A fully in-browser client and server web application debug and test environment Derrell Lipman University of Massachusetts Lowell Abstract ging and testing the entire application, both frontend and backend, within the browser environment. Once the ap- Traditional web-based client-server application devel- plication is tested, the backend portion of the code can opment has been accomplished in two separate pieces: be moved to the production server where it operates with the frontend portion which runs on the client machine has little, if any, additional debugging. been written in HTML and JavaScript; and the backend portion which runs on the server machine has been writ- 1.1 Typical web application development ten in PHP, ASP.net, or some other “server-side” lan- guage which typically interfaces to a database. The skill There are many skill sets required to implement a sets required for these two pieces are different. modern web application. On the client side, initially, the In this paper, I demonstrate a new methodology user interface must be defined. A visual designer, in con- for web-based client-server application development, in junction with a human-factors engineer, may determine which a simulated server is built into the browser envi- what features should appear in the interface, and how to ronment to run the backend code. This allows the fron- best organize them for ease of use and an attractive de- tend to issue requests to the backend, and the developer sign. to step, using a debugger, directly from frontend code into The language used to write the user interface code is backend code, and to debug and test both the frontend most typically JavaScript [6].
    [Show full text]
  • Ajax Smackdown Dojo Versus YUI
    Ajax Smackdown Dojo versus YUI Struts University Series Ajax Smackdown What is Ajax? Why is it popular now? What can it do for my applications? How do we write Ajax applications? Which library is the best fit for me? What is Ajax? standards-based presentation using XHTML and CSS; dynamic display and interaction using the Document Object Model; data interchange and manipulation using XML and XSLT; asynchronous data retrieval using XMLHttpRequest; and JavaScript binding everything together. How did Ajax Start? Outlook Web Access for Exchange 2000 DHTML version XMLHTTP ActiveX Ships with IE5 Discovered by OddPost, et al XMLHttpRequest (XHR) is now a W3C working draft War: What is it good for? Operating-system independence Microsoft threatened Rapid IE releases "Bugs were pouring into the web at a phenomenal rate" By 2000, Netscape is crushed. Can we give peace a chance? Browser innovation stabilizes AOL disbands Netscape in 2003 MS transfers IE developers to Avalon New computer, new browser February 2005: IE6 83% Mainstream supports XHR MS Way and W3C Way ✗ Ajax AC ✗ Dojo Toolkit ✗ Rico Library ✗ Ajax Client Engine ✗ DOM Drag ✗ RSList Library ✗ AJAX Java Server Faces ✗ Echo 2 ✗ SACK Framework ✗ ICEFaces ✗ Sarissa ✗ AJAX JSP Tag Library ✗ IWF ✗ script.aculo.us ✗ Ajax.NET ✗ JAHAH ✗ SWATO Library ✗ AjaxAspects ✗ Java2Script Pacemaker ✗ Taconite ✗ AjaxCaller ✗ JavaScript GameLib ✗ Tacos Library ✗ AJFormFramework ✗ JPSPAN ✗ ThinkCap JX ✗ AMFPHP ✗ JSMX ✗ Tibet Framework ✗ BackBAse ✗ libXmlRequest Library ✗ WebORB ✗ Bindows ✗ MAJAX Library ✗ WidgetServer
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Xml-Rpc, a Simple Xml-Based Rpc Mechanism
    XML-RPC indigoo.com XML-RPC INTRODUCTION TO XML-RPC, A SIMPLE XML-BASED RPC MECHANISM Peter R. Egli INDIGOO.COM 1/11 © Peter R. Egli 2015 Rev. 1.60 XML-RPC indigoo.com Contents 1. What is XML-RPC? 2. XML-RPC architecture 3. XML-RPC protocol 4. XML-RPC server implementation in Java 5. Where to use XML-RPC 2/11 © Peter R. Egli 2015 Rev. 1.60 XML-RPC indigoo.com 1. What is XML-RPC? XML-RPC is a remote procedure call protocol using XML as data format and HTTP as transport protocol. Advantages of XML-RPC: • Simple mechanism to call remote procedures on a machine with a different OS. • XML-RPC is language and platform independent. XML-RPC libraries are available in Java and other languages (e.g. .Net: http://xml-rpc.net/). • XML-RPC is not more than its name implies and thus is very simple and lean (very short specification, see http://xmlrpc.scripting.com/spec.html). Protocols and techniques behind XML-RPC: 1. XML - Formatting of the request and response and the arguments (wire protocol) 2. RPC - Remote call of procedures. 3. HTTP - Transport protocol for the XML („firewall-friendly“). <methodCall> <methodCall> … … XML- </methodCall> </methodCall> XML- RPC HTTP HTTP RPC client server <methodResponse> <methodResponse> … … </methodResponse> </methodResponse> 3/11 © Peter R. Egli 2015 Rev. 1.60 XML-RPC indigoo.com 2. XML-RPC architecture The client application accesses the server through a URL (= location where service resides). The XML-RPC listener receives requests and passes these to the handler (= user defined class servicing the request).
    [Show full text]
  • A Web Interface for 3D Visualization and Interactive Segmentation of Medical Images Hector Jacinto, Razmig Kéchichian, Michel Desvignes, Rémy Prost, Sébastien Valette
    A web interface for 3D visualization and interactive segmentation of medical images Hector Jacinto, Razmig Kéchichian, Michel Desvignes, Rémy Prost, Sébastien Valette To cite this version: Hector Jacinto, Razmig Kéchichian, Michel Desvignes, Rémy Prost, Sébastien Valette. A web in- terface for 3D visualization and interactive segmentation of medical images. 17th International Conference on 3D Web Technology (Web 3D), Aug 2012, Los Angeles, United States. pp.51-58, 10.1145/2338714.2338722. hal-00732335 HAL Id: hal-00732335 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00732335 Submitted on 14 Sep 2012 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. A Web Interface for 3D Visualization and Interactive Segmentation of Medical Images Hector Jacinto∗ Razmig Kechichian´ † Michel Desvignes‡ Remy´ Prost§ Sebastien´ Valette¶ OneFit Medical, SAS CREATIS GIPSA-LAB CREATIS CREATIS CREATIS Figure 1: Our framework enables visualization and processing of large medical images on modest computers. Here, a simple example of lung segmentation is shown. Abstract CR Categories: I.3.2 [Computer Graphics]: Graphic Systems—Remote systems** I.4.6 [Image Processing and We propose a web-accessible image visualization and processing Computer Vision]: Segmentation—Pixel classification; I.3.5 framework well-suited for medical applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Json Remote Procedure Call
    JSONJSON-RPC -RPCindigoo .com JSON REMOTE PROCEDURE CALL OVERVIEW OF JSON-RPC, A VERY SIMPLE AND LIGHTWEIGHT RPC PROTOCOL FOR DISTRIBUTED APPLICATIONS Peter R. Egli INDIGOO.COM1/11 © Peter R. Egli 2015 Rev. 1.60 JSON-RPC indigoo.com Contents 1. What is JSON-RPC? 2. JSON-RPC interactions 3. Transport options for JSON-RPC 4. JSON serialization format 5. JSON-RPC 2.0 examples 6. When to use JSON-RPC 2/11 © Peter R. Egli 2015 Rev. 1.60 JSON-RPC indigoo.com 1. What is JSON-RPC? JSON-RPC is a simple RPC mechanism, similar to XML-RPC. Protocol: Unlike XML-RPC which is a client-server protocol, JSON-RPC is a peer-to-peer protocol. It uses JSON (Javascript Object Notation, RFC4627) as the serialization format and plain TCP streams or HTTP as transport mechanism. JSON message types: JSON-RPC defines 3 message types: Request: Method invokation with arguments encoded in JSON. Response: Reply to method invokation containing the return argument encoded in JSON. Notification: Asynchronous request without response. Specification: JSON-RPC is very simple, i.e. the JSON-RPC specification is very short (ca. 5 pages). See http://json-rpc.org/. 3/11 © Peter R. Egli 2015 Rev. 1.60 JSON-RPC indigoo.com 2. JSON-RPC interactions JSON-RPC defines 2 message exchange patterns that support most of the usual peer2peer interaction schemes. A. Request-Response: The sending JSON peer invokes a method on the remote JSON peer with a JSON request. The remote peer sends back a JSON response message. JSON peer JSON peer Request message: Request (REQ) method Method to be invoked.
    [Show full text]