[e2e] Answer to Dave Reed Re: Fwd: Re: Question the other way round:
richard at bennett.com
Sat Nov 23 19:10:20 PST 2013
Network congestion isn’t, or doesn’t have to be, one enormous global problem that can only be solved one way. It can be viewed as myriad local problems that can be solved in ways that roll up into a coherent algorithm employed in many places at the same time. A big part of the solutions come from classifying flows according to application requirements and willingness to pay for grades of service.
I’m comfortably predicting that the best solutions will come from the commercial sector rather than the academic/government research sector, just like they have for privacy and security. Government has too many conflicts of interest to be very helpful here.
On Nov 23, 2013, at 4:57 PM, Ted Faber <faber at ISI.EDU> wrote:
> On 11/23/2013 04:04 PM, Detlef Bosau wrote:
>> Am 23.11.2013 22:15, schrieb Ted Faber:
>>> I took your statement about "VJCC causing congestion" to mean you took
>>> issue with the endpoints slowly opening their windows to probe the
>>> network state and the effect of that probing on network queues and
>>> consequently on other flows. The work I mentioned is part of a large
>>> body of work focused on reducing the effect of such probes.
>> Is there a possibility to avoid those probes at all?
> In the Internet, no.
> Scale and heterogeneity preclude the kinds of constraints on the network
> elements that make non-reactive congestion control feasible.
> Ted Faber
> http://www.isi.edu/~faber PGP:
> Unexpected attachment on this mail? See
Visiting Fellow, American Enterprise Institute
Center for Internet, Communications, and Technology Policy
Editor, High Tech Forum
More information about the end2end-interest