[e2e] Simulator for wireless network

[Joe Touch]

Detlef Bosau wrote:
> S. Keshav wrote:
>>
>>
>> This is the reason why 'proof by simulation', for computer systems, at
>> least, is farcical. Not only are simulators known to be buggy, but
>> they are also simulating a system that is too loosely coupled to be
>> adequately modeled.
> 
> Is a "proof by implementation" is better?
> 
> I don´t think so. Implementations are known to be buggy. Implementations
> are known to not behave as expected.
> ...

The difference is that if I actually transfer data over an
implementation, I have measured something real. If real measurements of
a real system measure the desired property - i.e., TCP throughput over
actually lossy links - then the result is what satellite people call
"ground truth".

As you note, such proof is an existence proof - you can't disprove all
alternatives, you can't prove that someone can't go faster or slower.
What you can prove is that something happened. Which is not possible
with simulation alone.

Joe

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://mailman.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/attachments/20070416/aea64faa/signature.bin