On Mar 5, 2013, at 18:58, Bob Braden <[email protected]> wrote: > Which is why we learned 30 years ago that building a transport protocol at > the application layer is generally a Bad Idea. Why do the same bad ideas keep > being reinvented?
Because we don't have a good selection of transport protocols at the transport layer. I'm chairing one of the WGs with a UDP-based application protocol. TCP's congestion control, even if we could use TCP, wouldn't do much for us. Now here is my point: I need TSV ADs that are strong on the technical side. A weak TSV AD might be -- too cautious, listening to all kinds of Cassandras that haven't bothered to look at the actual protocol, slowing us down unneededly, or -- too bold, allowing us to deploy a protocol that causes a congestion collapse that can only be alleviated by physically chiseling nodes out of walls. Clearly, I want neither of these to happen. (Now, we have received pretty good transport input in 2012, but the IESG will look at this in 2013, and that's where a highly educated decision has to be made.) Grüße, Carsten
