[e2e] Is a non-TCP solution dead?

[Injong Rhee]

The benefit for providers is that since they have tight control over what
goes on their networks, they can tax each applications. For instance, an
application makes money based on usage. The telcos typically gets some
percentage of that. Also since telcos charges the subscribers for the usage
of the networks, they get revenue from the air time. So the point is that
more the applications are being used, the  richer the telco gets. In this
regards, wireless carriers encourage applications like video on demand that
can hog their networks. We are seeing more than 10,000's downdloads of music
and video clips every day where each download costs a subscriber around $1 -
$2 per download or streaming (including content fee + air time). Going back
to the topic, if a protocol can generate more usage by being fast, the
carriers love that. Yes, there are plenty of incentives for telcos and app.
developers. Being so hung up on TCP, we might miss this opportunity.

-----Original Message-----
From: Ayyasamy, Senthilkumar (UMKC-Student) [mailto:saq66 at umkc.edu]
Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 1:43 AM
To: Injong Rhee; end2end-interest at postel.org
Subject: RE: [e2e] Is a non-TCP solution dead?




> First all, the wireless world is tightly controlled by wireless
> service providers. They control applications that run on handsets,
> media servers, and even content providers.

Yes. It is true even for the IP telephony market. But, looking at
the interest for wifi (wireless), broadband and flooding of
products like vonage (VoIP), we can expect a shift from the age
old telco models. But, obviously all these changes make your
customer a competitor. So, where lies the benefit for the
provider?