Re: Why don't we talk about segments/objects instaead of layers? Re: Lost Layer?

Am 14.02.2014 19:18, schrieb Djamel Sadok:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Detlef Bosau <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     So you want to orchestrate lightwaves etc. from the endpoints?
>
>
> This is going to be the case "yes" at least from the point of view of
> Cloud/Data center  peer application provisioning.
>
> Djamel
>  

The point is what you want to "orchestrate". You may well orchestrate a
path. You may well orchestrate constraints along a path, e.g. maximum
corruption ratio, minimum throughput or the like.

However, what I'm talking about is congestion and resource consumption.
And there I think it to be a misconception to regard congestion as a
global problem which has to be handled by the communication end points.

When we have a transient throughput shortage on hop 47 out of 80 because
of a short cross traffic consisting of one or two packets, it is
certainly not adequate to change an end to end congestion window for
this reason.  A short backpressure which certainly will reach the source
and throttle down the traffic for a short moment would fully suffice.

Who, in your opinion, shall decide which sender should be throtted?

Virtualizations are always nice - however, what happens concrete?

In a sense, a virtualization is always an iconostasis. The community
looks at the iconostasis, praying and worshiping -  and has no idea
what's happening behind it. The community only believes that bread and
wine will transform into blood and flesh of christ. (To my knowledge, in
orthodox services, the community does not see the consecration or
Eucharistic change but only listens to the prayers and chants of the
priests.)

The religious believer believes, that by this act his sins are forgiven.

The computer scientist believers, that by the act behind the iconostasis
a packet is conveyed.

Neither of these is interested in the details.