[e2e] TCP "experiments"

Marco Mellia mellia at tlc.polito.it
Tue Jul 30 12:13:15 PDT 2013


I think no one is saying that big companies are doing dumb things. It's just that the Internet is a really shared infrastructure.
Unless resources are infinite (which may be actually the case for Google :)), gaining something somewhere comes at the expenses of loosing something else somewhere else.

Considering TCP, it is easy to show that "I can gain". It is much harder to show "who else is loosing".
And weighting the plus and the minus is even more complicated.


Marco Mellia - Assistant Professor
Dipartimento di Elettronica e Telecomunicazioni
Politecnico di Torino
Corso Duca Degli Abruzzi 24
10129 - Torino - IT
Tel: +39-011-090-4173
Cel: +39-331-6714789
Skype: mgmellia
Home page: http://www.tlc-networks.polito.it/mellia

On Jul 30, 2013, at 1:34 AM, Jon Crowcroft <Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:

> the nice thing about a lot of the big cloud/web service outfits 
> is that they run a huge _range_ of applications so a point solution 
> tcp optimised for just one thing that 
> harmed the common case uses of TCP would be ruled out - 
> if you think about the mix of map/reduce, 
> video streaming, social net, searches, gmail, gfs, google docs, etc etc 
> (and similar mixes for microsoft bing + hotmail + azure etc; 
> and similar for apple iCloud, appstore, and similar for,
> oh, i dunno, maybe even facebook), 
> then I doubt very much we'd see them do something
> as narrowly dumb as people seem to imply here 
> (or deploy someone else's dumb narrow hack either)....
> as for impact between different cloud/web service providers
> (e.g. google being smart enough to optimise a TCP hack for all that stuff
> but still harm Amazon's traffic for book/cd buying, EC2, cloud music player
> etc etc, that would be incredibly ingeneiously dumb, 
> but also unlikely, since a major google's revenue depends on 
> people finding stuff on _other servers, 
> and finding those other services useful, 
> so it would be kind of silly to auction advert space to the highest bidder 
> iand deliver those adverts in a way that broke the advertised things....
> [I suppose you could deliver adverts that broke TCP services to
> servers that hadn't paid you to advertise them - that'd be pretty
> super duper whacky type of cyberwarfare game some folks at the NSA
> probably have fun thinking up.....
> maybe Huawei could deploy some DPI-based filter to harm succesful businesses only
> so as to bring down the whole capitalist imperialist western civilisation....oh no,
> wait, they need our net to work so they can sell us their routers...
> In missive <2EBB07CA-C011-4DC4-AACD-5A9D959C59D7 at isi.edu>, Joe Touch typed:
>>> On Jul 29, 2013, at 11:14 PM, Jon Crowcroft <Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk> wro=
>>> te:
>>>> google have extremely good instrumentation -
>>> They can now see how my PC talks to amazon.com now?
>>>> their shareholders would get upset if they deployed things that broke
>>>> the world badly -
>>> Even if they made Google 0.01% faster? And increased ad revenue as a result?=
>>> And stock value or dividends?
>>>> that's the NSA's job.
>>> Sound like you're referring to my first point above :-)
>>> Joe=20
> cheers
>   jon

More information about the end2end-interest mailing list