[e2e] end of interest
David P. Reed
dpreed at reed.com
Fri Apr 18 13:47:08 PDT 2008
I do exploration in Linux myself (I only run Windows in KVM, and only
when I absolutely have to). Regarding the Major Company's proprietary
TCP code - I agree that minor tweaks to the TCP standard are adopted as
long as the Major Company's programmers are the ones who act as
gatekeeprs. However, that's like what AT&T Bell Labs used to say when
they disparaged the Internet Experiment in the 1980's - "when those
lunatics working with Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn do something really
interesting, we'll put it in our network".
And of course we have people on this list who view any attempt to deploy
on the public Internet experiments among early adopters of Linux kernels
(like the Fedora distribution) as "evil things" to be stopped as a
matter of policy.
All of this puts grit in the gears of innovation by requiring that
innovators "get permission" from those who want to preserve their market
Sometimes there is an actual risk, but mostly it's fearmongering like
the AT&T argument against Hush-a-Phone. (a plastic piece you added to a
Bell phone that was reputed to have the potential of damaging the network).
If you have no hope of deploying most innovations without bargaining
with Major Co., then why bother doing research?
Lachlan Andrew wrote:
> Greetings David,
> Exploration can be done in Linux. Talking to an author of a Major
> Company's proprietary TCP code, he seemed quite open to implementing
> IETF standards, provided they work with the middle boxes.
> One interesting end-to-end issue is congestion control. That
> discussion has moved to the iccrg mailing list, which is quite
> On 18/04/2008, David P. Reed <dpreed at reed.com> wrote:
>> I personally think that the network community has become frustrated with the
>> inability to explore end-to-end protocols because the endpoint stacks are
>> "locked in" by vendors in proprietary code.
>> Jon Crowcroft wrote:
>>> last month's postings on this list was 80% CfPs;
>>> this month has 1 message which is a CfP;
>>> is this the end of interest in end-to-end?
>>> has the location/identifier debate mean everyone split?
>>> does virtualization mean unjustifying the ends?
>>> has mesh networking for nanotech
>>> or packet swarms and multipath routing diverted attention elsewhere?
>>> its not like there's no work out there - just look at
>>> this weeks NSDI programme:-
More information about the end2end-interest