[e2e] Reacting to corruption based loss
cannara at attglobal.net
Mon Jun 27 22:42:00 PDT 2005
John, if there are no goals for a design, then why choose the particular
aspects of the design?
The purpose of any transport protocol is to move data reliably and efficiently
from end to end. That's surely a goal. In other words, the transport layer
is designed to fulfill a commitment to the next layer above, that whatever
data that layer passes down, will get to the target's same layer, completely,
accurately and efficiently. That's what my remark was simply meant to
affirm. TCP, as commonly deployed, fails the last part of the commitment in
various real situations, and so is modified or not used when the goal is to
meet all parts of the commitment that any good transport must make.
John Kristoff wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 10:41:43 -0700
> Cannara <cannara at attglobal.net> wrote:
> > So, we come back to the core meaning of the e2e principle -- assure
> > ends know what each is doing and get data reliably & efficiently
> > transferred.
> I'm one person here, perhaps of many, who was not involved in the
> formation of the principle or the development of the early Internet.
> As someone who tries painstakingly to deeply understand what those
> who came before me have wrote and did I find it unhelpful to read
> reinterpretation of e2e ideas and Internet history from those who
> are often told they are wrong by others who were there.
> I quote the above only as one example and note to neophytes who may
> be stumbling upon your posts.
> Examples of functions that may be best served on an e2e basis are
> just examples. Perhaps I'm misrepresenting your quote above, but
> as I read it, you seem to be saying reliability and efficiency of
> packets transferred are core goals. When in fact, as I understand
> it, there are not any goals per se, only the core argument; where
> best to put those functions.
More information about the end2end-interest