[e2e] Open the floodgate

[Craig Partridge]

In message <4086B2FB.58ED16A6 at attglobal.net>, Cannara writes:

>"The High Priest of XCP came to one of our meetings to describe his    
>religion.  The discussion was polite, but we were not convinced."?

You've obviously never talked with Greg Chesson when he's passionate
about something :-). 

>Is the "we" the royal one?  Why the references: "High Priest", or "his
>religion"?  Sounds like religion on both sides maintaining suboptimal network
>design for the masses.  Which is, of course, what has happened.

As I recall the discussion (and yes, "we" is right as there were about
15 to 20 folks in the room), we struggled to find a common ground to talk.
Greg wanted to talk about how all protocol problems could easily be reduced to
a silicon processing engine if we were willing to rethink the problem, and
most of the E2E folks in the room said "so how do you plan to rethink
congestion control in the network and memory management in the end system?"
and Greg didn't want to talk about those issues.  Very frustrating all
around.

Craig

PS: In years since, Tim Strayer, who did a lot of the legwork on XTP, and
I have ended up working together and we periodically chat about XTP and
have a good time doing so.