[e2e] Why was hop by hop flow control eventually abandonded?
Detlef Bosau
detlef.bosau at web.de
Tue Jul 16 12:35:38 PDT 2013
Am 16.07.2013 19:43, schrieb Ted Faber:
>
> One of the many interesting ideas in Dina Katabi's XCP work is that she
> distributes the per-flow/per-switch data into the packets of the flow.
> It's not an obvious idea (in my dumb opinion) and reading about XCP with
> that in mind is worthwhile.
>
> I think at its core congestion control is an end-to-end problem, not so
> much because of state in elements (though that does matter) but
> diversity of elements. End-to-end congestion control makes TCP over
> avian carriers possible.
Hm. This exhibits an interesting twist of the loss differentiation
problem ;-)
However, I doubt TCP over Avian Carriers would allow a "coddle"
implementation which would be acceptable for PETA ;-)
>
> There are many elements in a network path that can become a flow's
> bottleneck.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhuMLpdnOjY
*SCNR*
> There's no way to guarantee that the thing that's
> bottlenecked is also smart enough (or honest enough) to participate in
> hop-by-hop congestion control. An end-to-end system can assess the path
> and make decisions without cooperation of internal elements (though an
> end-to-end system can make use of cooperation that it can get). No
> matter what's slowing your pigeons down, an end-to-end congestion
> control will react to it. Eventually. :-)
Oh yeah.... Hopefully, no PETA members become aware of this discussion....
>
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Detlef Bosau
Galileistraße 30
70565 Stuttgart Tel.: +49 711 5208031
mobile: +49 172 6819937
skype: detlef.bosau
ICQ: 566129673
detlef.bosau at web.de http://www.detlef-bosau.de
More information about the end2end-interest
mailing list