Seemingly of interest specifically to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> At 08:57 PM 1/21/2002 -0800, Lixia Zhang wrote: >>> Note I am not saying MPLS is the right solution for the problem. >>> To me the right solution to the above mentioned problem should be a >>> multi-path routing protocol. Dan K says: Whether its MPLS and/or QoS or something else it occurs to me intrinsically every extra byte that's not payload also is overhead. That's not saying its not worth doing, just that it has a cost. Also, Cisco et al are going to do some forklift upgrades here and there, and there are admin costs (eg. testing) to making something new work on a planetary scale. (1) There should be a model thats like a spanning tree model, weighted for any axis of freedom to make a completely deterministic solution to network routing given different flavors or quality. I worry though it might be a parellel to the bridge of Konigsburg problem. Which either has no deterministic solution; (I can't understand why), or is NP complete. Either is equally bad for a network with a billion people on it! http://thesaurus.maths.org/dictionary/map/word/835 Its right to the philosophy of packet switching versus circuit switching. If you book every hop and its mostly invariant, you just built a circuit switched system from a packet one. No body is going to *stop* anyone from doing that, but its driven by different goals. For instance, if in 2015 bandwidth went up 100 fold per user, would all the QoS/RSVP etc just be overhead and get turned off? This wouldn't be so bad of a thing. It occurs to me its pretty complex to say the least. for instance is it ethical to test a path from an application, yet ask for a RSVP circuit as a backup in case congestion kills the higher bandwidth, less certain path? If so its important the reservation processes have virtually no overhead if not used. Seems like a hard goal. Some infinite spanning process crawling Internet to discover paths and sort of allocate them, that a piggy thing for sure! And regarding tarriffed value added services, very un-internet like indeed. Regards to all! Regarding (1) seems like a component of that potential NSF process?
