Re: Delivery Times .... was Re: Bandwidth, was: Re: Free Internet & IPv6
Detlef Bosau <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.end2end |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Am 27.12.2012 22:48, schrieb [email protected]: > > Some LTE technical architecture folks have said to me, informally, > that LTE (unlike GPRS) was designed from the ground up for TCP/IP, > whereas GPRS was not really intended for TCP/IP. > > I don't know what that means, but perhaps one ought to ignore GPRS's > delay classes. > > O.k., in LTE, we don't talk about delay classes any longer ;-) We now call it "terminal classes" ;-) What I've read so far, LTE is often used as a DSL replacement, i.e. for STATIONARY users!!!! When it comes to mobility, LTE inevitably inherits essential properties of UMTS and the like. E.g. Rayleigh-fading. And therefore consequently some kind of opportunistic scheduling, which is necessary to make wireless networks affordable for the users. It may be possible that the problems are not that prominent as LTE is still yet to achieve huge numbers of customers. However, when LTE has fully reached the market, the problems are likely to be the same as in other mobile networks. (Not that political correctly spoken: Whoever said that LTE is designed for TCP, I don't buy this. The contrary is the case. The broader the range of latencies will be, the less stationary delivery times will become. As one particular problem.) -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Detlef Bosau Galileistraße 30 70565 Stuttgart Tel.: +49 711 5208031 mobile: +49 172 6819937 skype: detlef.bosau ICQ: 566129673 [email protected] http://www.detlef-bosau.de ------------------------------------------------------------------ The nonsense that passes for knowledge around wireless networking, even taught by "professors of networking" is appalling. It's the blind leading the blind. (D.P. Reed, 2012/12/25) ------------------------------------------------------------------