Re: Why do we need congestion control?

"Alex C. Snoeren" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.network.end2end
Message-ID <[email protected]>
I've remained deliberately quiet here, but will point out that the mere fact that one has to pay for a service does not mean there is actually a marginal cost.  Take, for example, 10G Ethernet---it is constantly sending bits to keep the link locked.  Only some of those bits are currently used to send actual packets, however.

- Alex

On Apr 3, 2013, at 8:43 AM, Detlef Bosau <[email protected]> wrote:

> I've just had a first look at the Snoeren paper.
> 
> OMG.
> 
> Remembers me of typical parliament debates.
> 
> Let the people babble as much as they can - afterwards make a "fair bullshit removal" (so, no party is advantaged while others are disadvantaged) and the rest is the reasonable content of the debate.
> 
> Perhaps, my knowledge is a bit outdated here, but I well remember times where people had to pay for network resources.
> 
> The idea is interesting anyway, however we should carefully discuss who eventually does the clean up work and which are the consequences of congestion.
> I agree with Dave, that erasure codes do not obviate the need for congestion control. Actually, at the moment we shift around the responsibilities, what does not necessarily clarify the situation.
> 
> The idea of the paper is appealing: When we have 10 flows, let each flow send as fast as he can - the network imposes fair drop on each flow and hence the experienced goodput is a consequence of the drop rate. A single flow may experience no drop and hence yields high good put, if the network is fully overcrowded, each flow experiences high packet drop and the goodput  is  hence low.
> 
> The first immediate objection is the same as with VJCC: How is fairness defined and what is the common resource for two flows? Particularly, we meet the same difficulty here as I have seen it in some papers by Frank Kelly: Implicitly, the common resource is always sending time.
> What about wireless networks? Where the shared resource is not always time but power? And when I may elaborate on this one: In UMTS like networks, the approach would only lead to maximum interference in a cell - which most likely simply would render the cell unusable.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.