[e2e] Is a non-TCP solution dead?

[Cannara]

John, I don't know enough about Inet2 to argue, but what you say makes sense
from what my friends at Stanford, who manage parts of the SU net, have to
say.  I believe, as the other emails have pointed out, that unless one
actually looks at pkt contents, one can't really get good stats, due to the
mimicking of TCP to get through filters.  This is likely why tools used by
CAIDA, Sprint, etc. would have to be examined to see what they're actually
looking at, if anything, other than simple port #s.

Alex

John Kristoff wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 24 Apr 2003 10:33:37 -0700
> Cannara <cannara at attglobal.net> wrote:
> 
> > John, the various non-TCP flows that have been increasing, and are
> > planned to be used even more in the future, center on media
> > communications, such as audio& video streaming, as well as IP phone,
> > conferencing, etc.  I'm not sure that Inet2 is representative for
> > what's going on in the bulk of the net.
> 
> I've heard that before and I'm not sure I can buy it without seeing some
> additional data showing that to be the case.
> 
> My intuition tells me that I2 is probably more representative of non-TCP
> than one might first imagine.  There are plenty of audio, video,
> conferencing and VoIP projects taking place over I2, perhaps in many
> cases more so than other parts of the net.  The reason I'm lead to
> believe that it would be fairly representative of non-TCP protocols is
> because generally the I2 community networks are relatively open.  Its
> users are probably much more likely to be able to use non-TCP protocols.
> Whereas in many other places, protocols, ports and applications are
> often heavily filtered.  In fact, I might be tempted to think that many
> of those non-TCP applications you're referring to may often be running
> over TCP port 80 to get past filters.
> 
> John