[e2e] TCP "experiments"
Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk
Wed Jul 31 01:01:39 PDT 2013
if someone is just making the sender side send faster no matter what the circumstance
then you'd be right - but a lot of TCP changes make it more _efficient_ which benefits
everyone - for example TCP Fast Open means less packets on the net, which is a
win-win scenario (lower latency for this user, less in the queues for other users)...
so a lot of the things people at google and other places are trying to do
are universally beneficial imho.....why would they not be?
In missive <FFE1446C-A44E-40E8-BAF4-BFF44082BFEE at tlc.polito.it>, Marco Mellia typed:
>>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
>>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> =
>>> the nice thing about a lot of the big cloud/web service outfits=20
>>> is that they run a huge _range_ of applications so a point solution=20
>>> tcp optimised for just one thing that=20
>>> harmed the common case uses of TCP would be ruled out -=20
>>> if you think about the mix of map/reduce,=20
>>> video streaming, social net, searches, gmail, gfs, google docs, etc =
>>> (and similar mixes for microsoft bing + hotmail + azure etc;=20
>>> and similar for apple iCloud, appstore, and similar for,
>>> oh, i dunno, maybe even facebook),=20
>>> then I doubt very much we'd see them do something
>>> as narrowly dumb as people seem to imply here=20
>>> (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 =
>>> but still harm Amazon's traffic for book/cd buying, EC2, cloud music =
>>> etc etc, that would be incredibly ingeneiously dumb,=20
>>> but also unlikely, since a major google's revenue depends on=20
>>> people finding stuff on _other servers,=20
>>> and finding those other services useful,=20
>>> so it would be kind of silly to auction advert space to the highest =
>>> iand deliver those adverts in a way that broke the advertised =
>>> [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 =
>>> so as to bring down the whole capitalist imperialist western =
>>> 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 =
>>>>> On Jul 29, 2013, at 11:14 PM, Jon Crowcroft =
>><Jon.Crowcroft at cl.cam.ac.uk> wro=3D
>>>>>> 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 =
>>>>>> the world badly -
>>>>> Even if they made Google 0.01% faster? And increased ad revenue as a =
>>>>> And stock value or dividends?
>>>>>> that's the NSA's job.
>>>>> Sound like you're referring to my first point above :-)
More information about the end2end-interest