[e2e] Reacting to corruption based loss

Simon Spero ses at tipper.oit.unc.edu
Tue Jun 7 15:35:30 PDT 2005

Jon Crowcroft wrote:

>and will lead to  far less memory wastage in hosts runnign all
>that complicated TCP protcol - they can just send web pages and video
>and audio and so on as a sequence of IP packets
>IP over TCP: way to go.
Yeah right.  What happens if one if the nodes on the path is
unavailable?  The data just gets dropped. That's completely unacceptable.
You might think that the correct approach would be to layer IP over
SMTP, to take advantage over well defined store and forward semantics.
You might think that, but you'ld be wrong, and you'ld be wrong for the
most obvious reason possible.  What part of  "IP over SMTP" involves XML
encodings and HTTP? None at all. Sheesh.

There's way too much network overbuild right now for it not to be
sensible to waste much of it, but the key is to waste responsibly.

What does it mean if the core has  infinite bandwidth, such that if
packet makes it way into the core it won't face a congestion drop till
it reaches the other side?
What happens when the most likely cause of packet loss becomes gremlin
perverted BGP converge ?

Where is end-to-end when  the middle ground vanishes, and the world is
split between the wired and connected, whose limits are unfathomable,
and the mobile and the mote-ile, where every packet and every joule
brings death a little closer?

"So close - the infinitesimal and the infinite. But suddenly, I knew
they were really the two ends of the same concept. The unbelievably
small and the unbelievably vast eventually meet - like the closing of a
gigantic circle. I looked up, as if somehow I would grasp the heavens.
The universe, worlds beyond number, God's silver tapestry spread across
the night."

   What?  You were talking about Bernie Ebbers?  Never mind.

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list