[e2e] Are we doing sliding window in the Internet?

[Injong Rhee]

>>
>> Sure. But I want folks to look at the tests and the reports  
>> carefully or
>> even try them by themselves. I am sure you will know it works! But  
>> i see
>> the attitude of people who are mad just because its default  
>> release in
>> Linux rather than trying to understand it technically first.
>
> People like me are mad because they ended up part of your experiment
> before we had a chance to review your results, understand it
> technically, and decide in the contents of an IETF standards track
> discussion whether it was useful.
>
> That's the point of the IETF standards track.


1. I publish the research results through peer-reviewed papers and  
perform my experiments in a safe way without involving you. Whether I  
should go through the standard process like IETF or not is purely  
based on political/business reasons. I personally don't do the  
experiment in public at others' expense.

2. I believe i have done justice in terms of conducting extensive  
experiments and publish them as much as I can. If you can, please let  
me know any references that have done more experiments for a standard  
TCP modification than we have done with CUBIC/BIC. I see some NS  
simulation results, but do you trust them? I have not got any  
satisfying answers for this.

3. The Internet allows end users to use any protocols they want.  
Those who use it will do so at their own risk/benefit analysis. What  
mechanisms other than IETF (gush!) do we have that prevent them from  
using a new protocol harming others unknowingly or not? IMO, it is  
due to the faults of the inherent business model of the Internet.


>
>> I am working on a congestion control public testbed where people  
>> can try
>> for themselves without investing too much time if they do care and we
>> are also working with a number of people (e.g., TMRG) to agree on
>> benchmark test suites.
>
> Why announce it? Why not just silently deploy it in Linux, omit the
> measurements because they'd be disruptive, and then declare it all  
> works
> in a few years?

Wait a minute. I am not a champion of this process either. It is  
unfortunate that it happened that way. If you are really looking for  
a "wide-scale" deployment test without involving any innocent  
bystanders like yourself, i wish you good luck.

My point is that the reviewers may themselves try their own  
experiments (in a safe way not involving a bystander) if possible,  
and base their decisions on technical factors, rather than on other  
political ones, and I am trying to make it easier .

>
> Seriously, I'm not against new protocols in general. I'm just not in
> favor of silent deployment of new protocols to the unaware.
>
> Joe
>