[e2e] Question the other way round:

Sergey Gorinsky sergey.gorinsky at imdea.org
Sun Nov 17 02:20:57 PST 2013

  Dear Detlef,

>> http://fourier.networks.imdea.org/~sergey_gorinsky/pdf/JSAC_Leveraging
>> _Rate-Delay.pdf
> At a very first glance, I see a bunch of formulae.
> I dealt with mobile networks for about 14 years now - and 
> the major lesson learned was: I don't believe in formulae.

  Actually, the formulae are contained within a page or so. The main idea of
the RD network services is quite simple: instead of differentiated pricing
or admission control (which seem difficult in the multi-provider Internet),
the rate-delay trade-off can serve as a natural basis for performance
differentiation. The design comes with built-in incentives for
delay-sensitive apps to use the low-delay D service and for
throughput-sensitive apps to communicate over the higher-throughput R

> a very particular situation. My general attitude is

  Making general conclusions based on very particular situations? Is there
an experimental evidence against existence of rate-delay trade-offs, or
rate-loss trade-offs in networks without buffers, in wireless settings?

> I put our probing and congestion reaction in question 

  Available network capacity is not fully predictable, especially in mobile
networks. While the uncertainty cannot be eliminated, it can be reduced.
Probing is a fundamental way of doing so. Without being too ambitions and
risking losses or delays (with buffers), how can one discover the full
transmission potential? Do you have in mind an alternative way of
determining an appropriate transmission rate?

  Thank you,


More information about the end2end-interest mailing list