On 2007-9-17, at 17:40, ext John Day wrote:
Fast Select was a single packet that opened, transfered data, and
closed a connection. The same as what Mr. Ford's description.
What you outline above is very different from SST. I'm surprised that
after reading the paper you'd think that there
On 2007-9-14, at 21:54, ext Tony Finch wrote:
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007, Keith Moore wrote:
I actually don't think that having multiple concurrent TCP
connections
between two peers is a bad thing. sure we could have a transport
protocol that provided multiple streams, but why bother when
Dumb question of the month. With the exception of the last claim
(...can prioritize...), this could just as easily describe SCTP.
What here is new? And define prioritize?
On Sep 17, 2007, at 2:02 AM, Lars Eggert wrote:
You might be interested in Bryan Ford's SST paper from this year's
On 2007-9-17, at 12:13, ext Fred Baker wrote:
Dumb question of the month. With the exception of the last claim
(...can prioritize...), this could just as easily describe SCTP.
What here is new? And define prioritize?
For how this relates to SCTP, let me refer you to Section 6. (And
yes,
Hi Lars,
comment in-line.
Best regards
Michael
On Sep 17, 2007, at 12:11 PM, Lars Eggert wrote:
On 2007-9-17, at 12:13, ext Fred Baker wrote:
Dumb question of the month. With the exception of the last claim
(...can prioritize...), this could just as easily describe SCTP.
What here is
I am afraid that I must agree with Fred. There is nothing very new
in this paper and its publication is merely another indication of how
far down the blind alley we have gone. I was surprised SIGCOMM even
published dressing up X.25 Fast Select with fancy words. Amazing.
At 2:13 -0700
On Mon, 17 Sep 2007, John Day wrote:
I am afraid that I must agree with Fred. There is nothing very new in this
paper and its publication is merely another indication of how far down the
blind alley we have gone. I was surprised SIGCOMM even published dressing up
X.25 Fast Select with fancy
Fast Select was a single packet that opened, transfered data, and
closed a connection. The same as what Mr. Ford's description. There
was nothing remotely transactional about Fast Select. It was a
direct counter to the proposal to put datagrams in X.25. It was a
silly idea, then and it
On Fri, 14 Sep 2007, Keith Moore wrote:
I actually don't think that having multiple concurrent TCP connections
between two peers is a bad thing. sure we could have a transport
protocol that provided multiple streams, but why bother when concurrent
TCP connections works pretty well?
I
