[Tsvwg] Re: [e2e] e2e principle..where??....
karir at wam.umd.edu
Tue Jun 5 08:59:09 PDT 2001
I think this is where I'm confused, apparently people have no
problems with caches(or proxies when they are used a caches).
However, caching proxies do the same thing...they terminate TCP connection
from client to them and then build another one from them to server(on cache
miss)... therefore they too are not e2e.
Infact TCP connection splitting is as common in todays networks as caches
are...but no one seems to be protesting cache deployment??
But I think what really answers my question is what somebody said in an
email..."if something is e2e that does'nt necessarily make it good...and
if something is not e2e that does'nt necessarily make it bad..."
basically e2e is but ONE argument in system design, it is quite
likely that other factors can outweigh e2e arguments...
Thanks to all of you that spent time answering my(often
On Tue, 5 Jun 2001 afalk at PanAmSat.com wrote:
> I think a lot depends on what the proxies are doing. Many proxies in this
> configuration terminate the TCP connections from one or both endpoints (see
> PEP) and don't maintain that the "the bits get delivered as sent" -- this
> mandate includes the packet header bits (i.e., the semantics). However, if
> the 'proxies' are performing compression or forward error correction -- bit
> transparent operations, the end-to-end argument is maintained (see SLOW,
More information about the end2end-interest