[e2e] Is a non-TCP solution dead?

[John Kristoff]

On Mon, 21 Apr 2003 12:30:25 -0700
Cannara <cannara at attglobal.net> wrote:

> collapse.  Now that TCP flows are waning in relation to others, the
> emperor's clothes are indeed diaphonous.

Can you provide some pointers to data supporting that assertion?  I
don't see that as true in our environment or on Internet2 in general. 
Perhaps in special case walled garden environments?  There may be some
slight skew with regards to UDP increasing slightly over the past couple
of months due to Slammer/Sapphire, but that seems minimal.  Any
observations about what is conversely increasing would be interesting to
know if you pointers to that info as well.

> On: "TCP definitely has its problems.  And, one can make the case for
> CC being in the network layer (or transport or application)." --
> exactly, on Network Layer, that is, because that's where the "network"
> congestion is! That's where reliable old telco switches, Sonet ADMs,
[...]
> handling -- i.e., this is the Network Layer to us.  More needs doing
> at the packet network layer (IP).

Rather than in the protocols themselves, there are a number of
strategies for handling congenstion within the network layer, but they
are often built into the network layer devices rather than IP itself
(e.g. RED, rate limiting, fair queueing and even plain old capacity
upgrades).  Without 'circuits' and fixed bandwidth sources and with a
relatively simple network layer in general, these are the sorts of
things that are available to handle network layer congestion.

John