[e2e] Switched Ethernet is Not an End-to-End System; was Protocols breaking the end-to-end argument
David P. Reed
dpreed at reed.com
Sat Oct 31 20:04:22 PDT 2009
On 10/31/2009 05:46 PM, Richard Bennett wrote:
> the fact that IP is a very thin abstraction of the Ethernet layer 2
> and that TCP is a vehicle for resolving problems that are typical of
> the CSMA/CD Ethernet environment
This statement is nonsense. IP is not a very thin abstraction of
Ethernet layer 2. IP is carried over many protocols other than the
Ethernet. TCP is an end-to-end protocol for in-order virtual circuit
data delivery, designed to work over IP, and to handle problems that
have nothing to do with CSMA/CD.
> In other words: does the success of Switched Ethernet suggest that
> it's better to think of network protocols as units of recursion than
> as collections of statically-placed functions that operate once and
> only once in the lifetime of a packet?
No. This is also nonsense, and begs the question. Network protocols
have never been described as not "collections of statically-placed
functions that operate once and only once in the lifetime of a packet".
Nor does the "success" of anything in the marketplace suggest how to think.
More information about the end2end-interest