[e2e] Switched Ethernet is Not an End-to-End System; was Protocols breaking the end-to-end argument
richard at bennett.com
Sat Nov 14 10:19:00 PST 2009
Maybe ISO had it right after all.
Detlef Bosau wrote:
> Let me again state my point of view as written yesterday in
> <4AFDD298.8050101 at web.de>
> Richard Bennett wrote:
>> Are you claiming the cell network is an edge-managed system? I don't
>> think so.
> A cell network integrates both kinds of networks, edge managed ones
> and centrally managed ones as well.
> The thrill is the coexistence of these.
> Particularly, as the separation (and vice versa the convergence) of
> both starts at extremely low layers, i.e. the physical layer when data
> and speech may use different, if compatible, line coding schemes.
> For quite some years I suffered from the paradigm that IP would be
> "the" convergence layer and both, data and speech as well, should be
> conveyed packet switched via IP datagrams.
> Eventually, this questionable approach is about to be overcome even in
> the CS community.
> Particularly, as the "there's no switching like packet switching"
> attitude of some CS guys ad the "there's no switching like line
> switching" attitude of some EE guys caused lots of misconceptions and
> even some severe waste of money spent for nonsense research projects.
> Perhaps, we should bring these useless arguments to an end and simply
> accept, that both concepts exist, both concepts are useful. They don't
> compete each other, they complete each other.
> We all should remember Hammings insight: “Mathematicians /stand on
> each other's/ shoulders while computer scientists /stand on each
> other's toes/.”
Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
More information about the end2end-interest