Brian- > On Aug 9, 2015, at 1:19 AMPDT, Brian E Carpenter > <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 09/08/2015 09:04, Geoff Thompson wrote: > > ... >>> The success of the (reasonably well layered) TCP/IP suite would indicate >>> that the market has decided that this is a cost well worth paying. >> >> Precisely my point, except that it is not true. The datagram service that >> was provided for with such "success" by TCP/IP does not provide the same >> service over all physical layers. In fact the now predominant physical >> layers do not provide sufficiently low-jitter, low loss service for all >> legacy services to work well. > > You mean, sufficient compared with 4800 baud modems over spotty analogue > phone lines, which were predominant when those legacy apps, right up > to HTTP/1.0, were invented?
Actually, I do. First of all, it wasn't that spotty in terms of errors per hour (which is what you need to count to factor out data inflation) and it had a number of secondary characteristics that weren't taken into account in formulating the layered model. > > What don't work well are *modern* services invented for broadband, in > the absence of anything accurately described as broadband. Not really. Communicating time information works much better in a real-time circuit switched network than it does in a packet based store and forward network. > > But, yes, I hope the final list of requirements for the homenet routing > protocol includes: works adequately on lossy wireless media with poor > multicast support. > > Brian Geoff _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
