fgqpo Seo

The British occupation of the Subcontinent brought its unique set of challenges and opportunities for the Afghan rulers. The British presence in India prevented Afghans from regaining Peshawar and its surroundings, which they had lost to the Sikhs under Ranjit Singh in the 1820s and 1830s. Additionally, in accordance with the so-called Gandumak (1879) and Durand (1893) treaties with the British, Afghans relinquished control of several frontier districts such as Khyber, Swat, Kurram, Sibi, Pishin and parts of the Wazir and Mohmand territories. Who to blame for these fiascos is another debate, and beyond the scope of this writing.

While Afghans lost territory on their southern and eastern borders to the Sikhs and British, they moved northward and gained control of the fertile Amu Darya Valley (which would become known as the Afghan Turkestan) lying between the Hindukush mountains and the Amu Darya. Prior to the Afghan conquest in the 1850s, the Amu Darya Valley—mostly populated by Uzbeks, Tajiks, and Turkmens—was ruled by autonomous Turkic rulers. Ahmad Shah Durrani’s conquest of the Valley was brief, and superficial. Even during Durrani’s reign the Amu Darya Valley had regained its autonomy, and would remain autonomous for about a century until Amir Dost Mohammad Khan incorporated the region into his kingdom.

Now that the Afghans were on the southern banks of the Amu Darya, Britain made sure that the Russians did not cross this river. The British wanted to keep the Russians as far away as possible from their Indian empire. From the British perspective, the Afghan advance on the Amu Darya was better than the Russians sitting on the Hindukush. Therefore, by providing a counterbalance to expansionist Russian forces, the British in India had effectively checked the Russian advance south of the Amu Darya, and helped ensure Afghanistan’s survival in the process. Britain continued to play its useful role, from the Afghan perspective, even after the Soviet Union replaced Russia as the occupier of Muslim Central Asia.

It was against the backdrop of such an important role Britain was playing in the region that the Afghans were surprised when they learned that the British wanted to leave India. Like most of the 565 Indian princely states, the Afghans wanted the British to stay on, and keep playing their role as a balancer. The only exception to this line of thinking amongst the Afghans came to fore during the 1928 trip to India of the Afghan King Amanullah Khan, who insisted on meeting Mohandas Gandhi, and delivered speeches endorsing the Congress’s demand for India’s independence. However, when Mohammad Nadir Khan assumed control of Kabul in 1929, he and his family were all in for Britain staying on in India for as long as possible.

However, if Britain wanted to leave India, the Afghans believed, it should safeguard the interests of India’s Muslims before leaving. Afghans had strong religious, historical, cultural, linguistic, and ethnic ties with India’s Muslims. Additionally, historically India’s Muslims had looked to Afghanistan for support and encouragement, and various Afghan rulers had been asked for assistance by India’s Muslims. By being independent, Afghanistan was also a source of inspiration to countless Indian Muslims, especially from Punjab, including Allama Iqbal.

In the 19th and 20th centuries many Punjabi Muslims rendered great services to Afghanistan. For instance, Dr. Abdul Ghani Jalalpuri (1864–1943), the principal of Islamia College Lahore, came to Afghanistan to work as Amir Abdur Rahman Khan’s secretary. He later became the principal of Habibia, Afghanistan’s first public school. Dr. Ghani was also a member of the Afghan delegation at Rawalpindi in July-August 1919 to discuss the terms of Afghanistan’s independence with Britain.

Can anyone imagine today the Afghan government’s employing a Punjabi Muslim from Gujarat who would take part in formal negotiations on behalf of the Afghan government? Such was the level of trust and intimacy between Afghans and Punjabi Muslims. Keeping in mind such close bonds between Afghans and India’s Muslims, Afghanistan could not be indifferent to the fate of India’s Muslims.

It may surprise many what the Afghans thought about partition and the fate of India’s Muslims. According to Sir William Kerr Fraser-Tytler, the British Minister in Kabul from 1935 to 1941, the Afghans believed: ‘...if they [the British] were going there was only one possible solution to the Indian problem, and that was a division of sovereignty between Muslim and Hindu [sic]. Such a solution, difficult though it might be, had some small chance of success; no solution based on a Union of India could lead to anything but chaos and ruin. It is interesting to recollect that this point of view was held in Kabul long before its validity was admitted in Britain or India.’[i]

In addition to trying to safeguard India’s Muslims’ interests, Afghans wanted to safeguard their own interests. The Afghans were deeply suspicious of the caste Hindu-dominated Congress party and their allies in the Northwest Frontier Province, the so-called Red Shirts or Khudai Khidmatgars, led by the firebrand aristocrat Abdul Ghaffar Khan. Although after partition his relations improved with Kabul, the Afghan royal family (like the Pakistan Government) constantly remained suspicious of Abdul Ghaffar Khan’s real intentions.

With regards to Hindus and Sikhs, Afghans did not hate them per se. Afghanistan itself was home to a sizable Hindu and Sikh population who lived in peace and harmony with their Muslim country men and women. In fact, when, during the communal riots brought about by partition, thousands of Hindus and Sikhs were being massacred in the NWFP, Afghanistan’s Hindus and Sikhs continued to live in peace and harmony.

The Afghans, however, were aware of the baggage of history: the invasions of India from and through Afghanistan. The Afghans were also aware how intensely Hindu nationalists disliked them and their country, which Hindu extremists regarded as a thorn in the side of their Akhand Bharat project. As such, Afghanistan’s sharing a common border with a so-called united India, where power would be concentrated in the hands of Hindu nationalists at New Delhi, was an anathema to the Afghans.

The Afghans believed ‘a division of sovereignty’ (in other words a division of India) between Muslims and Hindus, which satisfied India's Muslims and kept the Hindu nationalists away from Afghanistan, would satisfy the Afghans as well. As mentioned earlier, according to the Afghans, forming a so-called Union of India, where Hindus would dominate Muslims, would only lead to ‘chaos and ruin,’ and would not be acceptable to Afghanistan.

As early as 1937, there were alarming signs of Hindu domination, which, if left unchecked, could have disastrous consequences for India’s minorities, especially Muslims. After the 1937 provincial elections in Bombay, the provincial Congress leader Khurshed Nariman, a Parsi, was supposed to become Bombay’s chief minister. But because Nariman was not a caste Hindu, the ministry was presented by Pandit Nehru to a fellow Brahmin B. G. Kher. When Nariman complained about this unfair treatment, he was promptly silenced by Pandit Nehru while Mohandas Gandhi looked the other way.

In Bihar the provincial Congress leader Dr. Syed Mahmud was expected to become the provincial chief minister, but he too was passed over for the caste Hindu S. K. Sinha. In addition to these fiascos, the Congress turned down overtures of cooperation from the Muslim League. A decade after partition, former Congress president Maulana Abul Kalam Azad (1939-1946), criticized in his memoir India Wins Freedom the Congress party and particularly Pandit Nehru for unfairly treating Nariman and Mahmud and turning down Muslim’s League offer of cooperation. The passages critical of Pandit Nehru in Maulana’s memoir were withheld from publication for 30 years, but were finally released in late 1980s.

A decade after the Congress’s 1937 blunders, the Afghans, to their great relief, learned that the Subcontinent would be partitioned and the two sovereign states of Pakistan and India would be born on August 14 and 15 respectively. As such, the Afghans would not have to share a common border with a Hindu majority India. A few days after partition, during the 1947 Afghan Independence Day celebrations, the Afghan King Mohammad Zahir declared the following in support of Pakistan: ‘When we see India in its present state we feel for our co-religionists. I have sent messages of greetings to both Pakistan and India. Our brothers are Pakistanis, and we will help them even with our blood and with the sword.’

Shortly after partition, Kashmir’s Hindu ruler Maharaja Hari Singh’s Dogra Hindu troops started massacring Kashmiri Muslims. In October 1947, Pashtun tribesmen from Pakistan left for Kashmir to liberate it from Hari Singh’s atrocities. Around about the same time, Afghan tribesmen from Khost crossed the border into Pakistan and continued on to Kashmir to help the Pakistani tribesmen in liberating Kashmir.

In our heart of hearts we Afghans have always sympathized with and supported Kashmiris against the unjust Indian occupation. According to Aslam Khan Khattak, the Pakistan ambassador in Kabul in the 1950s, the former Afghan Prime Minister Shah Mahmud (King Mohammad Zahir’s uncle) once remarked in his presence: ‘Oh Lord, give me shahadat (martyrdom) while fighting side by side with my Pakistani brethren on the Kashmir front.'[ii]

The Muslim majority state of Jammu & Kashmir should have, without any ifs or buts, gone to Pakistan. According to the partition plan, given their location, population and other considerations (such as communications), princely states only had the choice to opt for either India or Pakistan. On all these accounts, Pakistan was in a better position than India for Kashmir to accede to.

However, even before partition Pandit Nehru had expressed interest in acquiring Kashmir for India. Pandit Nehru had written to the Viceroy Louis Mountbatten (known as Dickie to his friends) prior to partition that, ‘the normal and obvious course appears to be for Kashmir to join the Constituent Assembly of India...It is absurd to think that Pakistan would create trouble if this happens.'[iii] Given that Kashmir still remains a disputed region to this day shows that India’s occupation of Kashmir was neither ‘normal,’ nor ‘obvious.’

I have highlighted in an earlier article Afghanistan’s complications in its relations with Pakistan, and why the bilateral relationship was not off to a great start. Readers can refer to it for more details. Here I would like to emphasize that the idea that Afghanistan was opposed to Pakistan from day one is historically inaccurate. Afghans wanted Pakistan to exist, and to succeed. Afghanistan’s conduct, which earned it Pakistan’s gratitude, during the 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pak wars is a testament to that effect.

Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1) is a standard interface description language for defining data structures that can be serialized and deserialized in a cross-platform way. It is broadly used in telecommunications and computer networking, and especially in cryptography.[1]

Protocol developers define data structures in ASN.1 modules, which are generally a section of a broader standards document written in the ASN.1 language. The advantage is that the ASN.1 description of the data encoding is independent of a particular computer or programming language. Because ASN.1 is both human-readable and machine-readable, an ASN.1 compiler can compile modules into libraries of code, codecs, that decode or encode the data structures. Some ASN.1 compilers can produce code to encode or decode several encodings, e.g. packed, BER or XML.

ASN.1 is a joint standard of the International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) in ITU-T Study Group 17 and ISO/IEC, originally defined in 1984 as part of CCITT X.409:1984.[2] In 1988, ASN.1 moved to its own standard, X.208, due to wide applicability. The substantially revised 1995 version is covered by the X.680 series.[3] The latest revision of the X.680 series of recommendations is the 6.0 Edition, published in 2021.

ASN.1 is a data type declaration notation. It does not define how to manipulate a variable of such a type. Manipulation of variables is defined in other languages such as SDL (Specification and Description Language) for executable modeling or TTCN-3 (Testing and Test Control Notation) for conformance testing. Both these languages natively support ASN.1 declarations. It is possible to import an ASN.1 module and declare a variable of any of the ASN.1 types declared in the module.

ASN.1 is used to define a large number of protocols. Its most extensive uses continue to be telecommunications, cryptography, and biometrics.

ASN.1 is closely associated with a set of encoding rules that specify how to represent a data structure as a series of bytes. The standard ASN.1 encoding rules include:

ASN.1 recommendations provide a number of predefined encoding rules. If none of the existing encoding rules are suitable, the Encoding Control Notation (ECN) provides a way for a user to define his or her own customized encoding rules.

Privacy-Enhanced Mail (PEM) encoding is entirely unrelated to ASN.1 and its codecs, but encoded ASN.1 data, which is often binary, is often PEM-encoded so that it can be transmitted as textual data, e.g. over SMTP relays, or through copy/paste buffers.

This is an example ASN.1 module defining the messages (data structures) of a fictitious Foo Protocol:

This could be a specification published by creators of Foo Protocol. Conversation flows, transaction interchanges, and states are not defined in ASN.1, but are left to other notations and textual description of the protocol.

Assuming a message that complies with the Foo Protocol and that will be sent to the receiving party, this particular message (protocol data unit (PDU)) is:

ASN.1 supports constraints on values and sizes, and extensibility. The above specification can be changed to

This change constrains trackingNumbers to have a value between 0 and 199 inclusive, and questionNumbers to have a value between 10 and 20 inclusive. The size of the questions array can be between 0 and 10 elements, with the answers array between 1 and 10 elements. The anArray field is a fixed length 100 element array of integers that must be in the range 0 to 1000. The '...' extensibility marker means that the FooHistory message specification may have additional fields in future versions of the specification; systems compliant with one version should be able to receive and transmit transactions from a later version, though able to process only the fields specified in the earlier version. Good ASN.1 compilers will generate (in C, C++, Java, etc.) source code that will automatically check that transactions fall within these constraints. Transactions that violate the constraints should not be accepted from, or presented to, the application. Constraint management in this layer significantly simplifies protocol specification because the applications will be protected from constraint violations, reducing risk and cost.

To send the myQuestion message through the network, the message is serialized (encoded) as a series of bytes using one of the encoding rules. The Foo protocol specification should explicitly name one set of encoding rules to use, so that users of the Foo protocol know which one they should use and expect.

Below is the data structure shown above as myQuestion encoded in DER format (all numbers are in hexadecimal):

DER is a type–length–value encoding, so the sequence above can be interpreted, with reference to the standard SEQUENCE, INTEGER, and IA5String types, as follows:

Alternatively, it is possible to encode the same ASN.1 data structure with XML Encoding Rules (XER) to achieve greater human readability "over the wire". It would then appear as the following 108 octets, (space count includes the spaces used for indentation):

Alternatively, if Packed Encoding Rules are employed, the following 122 bits (16 octets amount to 128 bits, but here only 122 bits carry information and the last 6 bits are merely padding) will be produced:

In this format, type tags for the required elements are not encoded, so it cannot be parsed without knowing the expected schemas used to encode. Additionally, the bytes for the value of the IA5String are packed using 7-bit units instead of 8-bit units, because the encoder knows that encoding an IA5String byte value requires only 7 bits. However the length bytes are still encoded here, even for the first integer tag 01 (but a PER packer could also omit it if it knows that the allowed value range fits on 8 bits, and it could even compact the single value byte 05 with less than 8 bits, if it knows that allowed values can only fit in a smaller range).

The last 6 bits in the encoded PER are padded with null bits in the 6 least significant bits of the last byte c0 : these extra bits may not be transmitted or used for encoding something else if this sequence is inserted as a part of a longer unaligned PER sequence.

This means that unaligned PER data is essentially an ordered stream of bits, and not an ordered stream of bytes like with aligned PER, and that it will be a bit more complex to decode by software on usual processors because it will require additional contextual bit-shifting and masking and not direct byte addressing (but the same remark would be true with modern processors and memory/storage units whose minimum addressable unit is larger than 1 octet). However modern processors and signal processors include hardware support for fast internal decoding of bit streams with automatic handling of computing units that are crossing the boundaries of addressable storage units (this is needed for efficient processing in data codecs for compression/decompression or with some encryption/decryption algorithms).

If alignment on octet boundaries was required, an aligned PER encoder would produce:

(in this case, each octet is padded individually with null bits on their unused most significant bits).

Most of the tools supporting ASN.1 do the following:

A list of tools supporting ASN.1 can be found on the ITU-T Tool web page.

ASN.1 is similar in purpose and use to protocol buffers and Apache Thrift, which are also interface description languages for cross-platform data serialization. Like those languages, it has a schema (in ASN.1, called a "module"), and a set of encodings, typically type–length–value encodings. Unlike them, ASN.1 does not provide a single and readily usable open-source implementation, and is published as a specification to be implemented by third-party vendors. However, ASN.1, defined in 1984, predates them by many years. It also includes a wider variety of basic data types, some of which are obsolete, and has more options for extensibility. A single ASN.1 message can include data from multiple modules defined in multiple standards, even standards defined years apart.

ASN.1 also includes built-in support for constraints on values and sizes. For instance, a module can specify an integer field that must be in the range 0 to 100. The length of a sequence of values (an array) can also be specified, either as a fixed length or a range of permitted lengths. Constraints can also be specified as logical combinations of sets of basic constraints.

Values used as constraints can either be literals used in the PDU specification, or ASN.1 values specified elsewhere in the schema file. Some ASN.1 tools will make these ASN.1 values available to programmers in the generated source code. Used as constants for the protocol being defined, developers can use these in the protocol's logic implementation. Thus all the PDUs and protocol constants can be defined in the schema, and all implementations of the protocol in any supported language draw upon those values. This avoids the need for developers to hand code protocol constants in their implementation's source code. This significantly aids protocol development; the protocol's constants can be altered in the ASN.1 schema and all implementations are updated simply by recompiling, promoting a rapid and low risk development cycle.

If the ASN.1 tools properly implement constraints checking in the generated source code, this acts to automatically validate protocol data during program operation. Generally ASN.1 tools will include constraints checking into the generated serialization / deserialization routines, raising errors or exceptions if out-of-bounds data is encountered. It is complex to implement all aspects of ASN.1 constraints in an ASN.1 compiler. Not all tools support the full range of possible constraints expressions. XML schema and JSON schema both support similar constraints concepts. Tool support for constraints varies. Microsoft's xsd.exe compiler ignores them.

ASN.1 is visually similar to Augmented Backus-Naur form (ABNF), which is used to define many Internet protocols like HTTP and SMTP. However, in practice they are quite different: ASN.1 defines a data structure, which can be encoded in various ways (e.g. JSON, XML, binary). ABNF, on the other hand, defines the encoding ("syntax") at the same time it defines the data structure ("semantics"). ABNF tends to be used more frequently for defining textual, human-readable protocols, and generally is not used to define type–length–value encodings.

Many programming languages define language-specific serialization formats. For instance, Python's "pickle" module and Ruby's "Marshal" module. These formats are generally language specific. They also don't require a schema, which makes them easier to use in ad hoc storage scenarios, but inappropriate for communications protocols.

JSON and XML similarly do not require a schema, making them easy to use. They are also both cross-platform standards that are broadly popular for communications protocols, particularly when combined with a JSON schema or XML schema.

Some ASN.1 tools are able to translate between ASN.1 and XML schema (XSD). The translation is standardised by the ITU. This makes it possible for a protocol to be defined in ASN.1, and also automatically in XSD. Thus it is possible (though perhaps ill-advised) to have in a project an XSD schema being compiled by ASN.1 tools producing source code that serializes objects to/from JSON wireformat. A more practical use is to permit other sub-projects to consume an XSD schema instead of an ASN.1 schema, perhaps suiting tools availability for the sub-projects language of choice, with XER used as the protocol wireformat.

For more detail, see Comparison of data serialization formats.

Property and casualty ( P&C ) insurers are companies that provide coverage on assets, as well as liability insurance for accidents, injuries, and damage to

We pride ourselves on keeping you up to date on events in Lanarkshire taking place throughout the year From the latest theatre events and live music

The International Standard Book Number is a number that identifies a title or edition of a title from a particular publisher internationally. The book is identified by the attributes of all those products created to be used as books.

The EAN-13 symbology is used to generate the ISBN barcode.

You can use the code to:

Best Hospitals for Gastroenterology & GI Surgery in Chicago, IL · Rush University Medical Center · Northwestern Memorial Hospital · University of Chicago Medical

1. Click Start.
2. Type Windows Update and press Enter.
3. Click on Check for Updates.
4. Install any updates.

Main usage of Alsigra 100mg Tablet is for Treatment of Erectile dysfunction.

Alsigra 100mg Tablet

Alsigra 100mg Tablet belongs to a group of medicines called PDE5 inhibitors. It works by relaxing the blood vessels in your penis. This allows blood to flow into the penis and produce an erection when sexually aroused. This medicine will only help get an erection if you are sexually stimulated. It is very effective but needs to be taken at least 30 minutes before sexual activity.

Do not take this medicine if you also take medicines called nitrates (often given for chest pain).