Brian-
On Aug 9, 2015, at 1:19 AMPDT, Brian E Carpenter
brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com 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
homenet@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
